Re: [boost] [nowide] Library Updates and Boost's broken UTF-8 codecvt facet

Subject: Re: [boost] [nowide] Library Updates and Boost's broken UTF-8 codecvt facet
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-10-08 11:52:10

On 10/8/15 6:39 AM, Artyom Beilis wrote:
> Boost.Serialization's does not even built on my platform Ubuntu gcc-4.8
>
>>>
>
>>>   Regarding the test - I have my own that the old facet obviously
>> wouldn't pass.
>>
>> That is not my question.  Will your new version pass the current test?
>>
>
>
> http://www.boost.org/development/tests/master/developer/output/teeks99-05a-Ubuntu12-04-64-boost-bin-v2-libs-serialization-test-test_array_text_warchive-test-gcc-4-8-debug.html

I meant:

https://github.com/boostorg/serialization/blob/develop/test/test_utf8_codecvt.cpp

Of course I expect that your test should be better - but I would expect 
it to pass the current test.  Unless of course if the current test is 
wrong - which could well be a problem.

If I had my druthers, I'd like to see a library for aiding in the 
creating of code convert facets including documentation about what they 
are and how to use them.  Examples of usage would be the new utf8codecvt 
facet we're talking about.

Of course that's a large project.  And for all I know your library 
already does this.

The way I usually go about this is:

a) I have a problem - I need a portable codecvt facet for doing some 
specific thing - out put utf8 for example.

b) I troll the web and boost looking for an idiot proof solution.

c) If I find one, I subject the documentation to a cursory examination, 
and then insert the component into mey app and see if it works.  If it 
works, then I'm golden.  I'll likely spend more time with the library in 
different contexts.  If it doesn't I'll just move on.

So this is what I'd like to see - It may already be done and I haven't 
looked at it because I already had a "solution" or maybe it's done in a 
way which isn't idiot proof enough for me.  At one time I did take a 
cursory look at the documentation.

I'm not sure I really have a point here.  I've just been unsatisfied 
with our current solution and hope for something more "complete"

Robert Ramey