Re: [boost] [format] Any interest in decoupling it from std::basic_string?

Subject: Re: [boost] [format] Any interest in decoupling it from std::basic_string?
From: Luke Elliott (lukester_null_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-07-05 12:44:34

On 05/07/2012 17:22, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Luke Elliott <lukester_null_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>> I should mention that the performance of boost.format is not an issue as
>>>> it's not used in any time critical code - just a while load of pain if
>>>> unable to support alternative strings, hence my hackery.
>>>
>>> If performance is not an issue, why would you use another string type?
>>>
>>
>> Performance of boost.format is not important; of strings themselves it
>> very much is.
>
> Right. So what exactly is the problem?
> Return type of format::str()?
>

Well "problem" is a bit strong, but str() is the issue with using 
alternative strings with "no" changes to client code AFAICT. I'm sure 
there are many other ways to achieve the same result, but this is the 
least intrusive for me.

Anyway, no big deal if there's no interest - it doesn't seem like 
there's much development of format these days so it's not like it's 
going to be much effort with each new boost release to keep the patch 
up-to-date.

(I guess there's also no interest in a hack around the (format("%u") % 
byte_t(65)) == "A" problem...)

Regards

Luke.