Subject: Re: [boost] [lexical-cast] version of lexical_cast in 1.46.1 is quite older than in trunk
From: Vicente BOTET (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-04-07 10:56:32
> Message du 07/04/11 11:23
> De : "Vladimir Batov"
> A : boost_at_[hidden]
> Copie Ã :
> Objet : Re: [boost] [lexical-cast] version of lexical_cast in 1.46.1 isquite older than in trunk
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Vicente BOTET"
> >> ... the Convert proposal sitting
> >> in the queue and getting ready for the review this month. I'd suggest
> >> anyone
> >> interested in additional lexical_cast features to have a look the the
> >> proposal
> >> if it already satisfies your needs. If not, then it's most definitely
> >> open for
> >> improvements/extensions/ideas/etc.
> > It will be great to have a performance comparison between your library and
> > lexical cast (with a without the proposed modifications) as one of the
> > major
> > concerns of your library were to provide an interface that performs better
> > than lexical_cast.
> As I understand the main goal of the Convert library was to provide richer
> interface (or so I understood). Namely, to support configurable throwing
> behavior, locale, formatting and ability to extend if/when needed.
> Therefore, quite a bit of effort was put into working out the framework, the
> interface. In that light at this stage I feel that trying to address
> performance in Convert would be somewhat premature. Consequently, I do not
> expect the Convert library to do to/from-string conversions any better or
> worse than lexical_cast as at present Convert uses the same
> std::stream-based engine for those conversions. Having said that I do
> believe that performance needs to be addressed at some point and I am
> currently leaning towards deploying Spirit facilities to do that. If anyone
> has better suggestions, implementations, I do not see anything stopping them
> from incorporating those improvements into Convert. Obviously, before we go
> ahead doing that we have to find out if that library has any future to begin
I replied to your post because you were suggesting the PO to see your library. As the PO was proposing performance improvements on lexical cast I thought that maybe your library could already provide what the PO was expecting. Unfortunatelly for PO it seems it is not the case.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk