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
> > 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.
* a really slick version using Spirit (GSoC project?).
--- Paul A. Bristow, Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal LA8 8AB UK +44 1539 561830 07714330204 pbristow_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk