Re: [boost] [convert] Boost.Convert Library Review

Subject: Re: [boost] [convert] Boost.Convert Library Review
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-05-02 13:12:14

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]
> On Behalf Of Matthew Chambers
> Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 5:47 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] [convert] Boost.Convert Library Review

I don't have time a proper review  (we need *much* longer review periods!),

but  having just read the docs and followed the discussions,

I also mirror these views.

> After reading the other reviews of Vladimir's library, I mirror Hartmut's
> summary:
> > To summarize: I feel uneasy to suggest accepting this library as it
> > covers functionality which in my opinion belongs into lexical_cast<>
> > in the first place. It is a natural extension of lexical_cast's
> > functionality and for this reason should be merged with lexical_cast
> > instead of being accepted as a separate library. Having two stream
> > based conversion libraries in Boost (which moreover while
> > complementing each other, sometimes expose different
> > behavior) does not make any sense to me.

Does not make much sense to me either - BUT

> > OTOH, the functionality exposed by convert is much needed and has to
> > make it into Boost somehow.

Strongly agree.  We are missing out while trying to find the ideal solution.

So I'd favour accepting Boost.Convert, but being prepared to fairly quickly
deprecate/supersede it in favour of

*  A new version of lexical_cast which does take more arguments.

and/or

* a really slick version using Spirit  (GSoC project?).

Paul

---
Paul A. Bristow,
Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal LA8 8AB  UK
[phone]  07714330204
pbristow_at_[hidden]