Re: [boost] [Format] Making a change

Subject: Re: [boost] [Format] Making a change
From: John M. Dlugosz (mpbecey7gu_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-02-14 07:56:40

On 2/13/2012 11:04 PM, Daryle Walker wrote:
>
> Wasn't there recently another thread about this?  If you didn't read that thread, it referredto another thread from 7 years ago about the same thing.  Boost.Format already provides amember function and a free function to convert a format object to a string.  The conversionsthrow if the format object hasn't had all of its parameters filled in.  You want to add a thirdmethod?  Unlike int vs. double, a formatting object and a string are NOT conceptually the samething, so adding an implicit conversion would be bad.  (Actually, we should limit implicitconversions in general; so converting weakly-connected types should definitely be out.)
> Daryle W.
>   		 	   		
>

Yes, I do indeed.  Both forms of str require extra parens and is a bit awkward for 
in-place formatting of strings, in particular for error messages like the argument to an 
exception constructor.

Would it go over well if we _removed_ the ability for ostream to take a formatter without 
an extra function call?  After all, you could use str for that too!  My impression is that 
the ostream use-case was thought about, but the exception case was not.
I do admit that for a named string variable, initializing it using free-function str isn't 
too bad.

—John