Re: [boost] Interest in Base2/16/32/64 Encoding Library?

Subject: Re: [boost] Interest in Base2/16/32/64 Encoding Library?
From: Thomas Kemmer (tkemmer_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-07-09 02:00:30

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Robert Ramey <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> It always seemed to me that it would be interesting to use
> this approach to compose code_convert facets to taste.
> But code_convert facets aren't all that popular so the idea.
> So it's not clear that this would be a worthwhile project.

I think a problem with the codecvt approach might be that, although
codecvt supports N:M conversion (e.g. 3:4 in case of Bas64),
std::basic_filebuf can only use codecvt facets that define a 1:N conversion [1].

>From what I read so far, the basic question seems to be whether
encoding/decoding should be supported as a "first-class" algorithm
(like copy, transform, rotate, etc.) or not. From my experience, the
subtleties involved (padding, handling of non-alphabet characters) are
easier to handle with the algorithm approach.

[1] http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/locale/codecvt/do_out