Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [review] string convert
From: Vicente BOTET (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-05-07 08:38:24

> Message du 06/05/11 02:58
> De : "Vladimir Batov"
> A : boost_at_[hidden]
> Copie à :
> Objet : Re: [boost] [review] string convert
> > Vicente BOTET> writes:
> > ..
> > I suspect that these complex classes you are talking off don't define the
> > input/ouput stream operator to work with your conversion framework.
> Jeez, is it really that hard to accept that 'convert' works and is used with
> many classes complex or not. Say, a Train class is complex as it has a *lot* of
> stuff. We serialize/unserialize the class to/from XML using 'convert'. Train has
> op>>() op<<().
> > The classes I expect to be used are regular classes with value semantics.
> Our classes with value- and pointer-semantics (pimpl-based) are as
> regular/normal. They just happen to be not your classes.

When I used regular classes I was not referring to normal or abnormal classes, but what Adobe ASL and Stepanov call regular types. Sorry for the imprecision.

You can assimilate a regular class as one that behaves like a built-in type. But, please see
for more information) or google for Fundamentals of Generic Programming, regular types, Stepanov.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at