Boost logo

Boost :

From: Mike (mike.dev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-11-02 16:07:48

   I have been meaning to have a closer look at that library for weeks
   but unfortunately I don't sem to find the time to do so. So I'm just
   down some thoughts:

   First of all, I hihgly support the inclusion of this
   library into boost (assuming there aren't any major design problems).
   C++ needs unicode support easy text processing - the former being a
   for the latter. The only way we get those things into the standard is
   if the
   different approaches get battle tested in anger, in real-life projects.

   What the average programmer like me (who is not working on a text
   editor) imho needs is the ability to read text from one interface, do
   some basic
   input validation, normalize it, (potentially) split it up and or parse
   parts of it,
   store other parts through a different interface, retrieve all of that
   later and
   send it on through a different text based interface. During all that I
   don't want
   to have to worry too much about whethernon-asccii text got broken in
   betweeen. And in particular I should not have to worry about the
   of how unicode works to o that.

   For that, I think it is much more important to have encoding aware
   types and easy to use transcoding functions than a full set of unicode
   text processing algorithms. Not that I'm not happy when they are there,
   but at least for the standard, lets please focus on what standards are

   Facilitate and enable components from different 3rd pary vendors to
   seemlessly together!

   I'm also very happy to see that the library focuses on the 90% cases
   of trying to be flexible enough to be usable for every possible use
   case and
   under every possible circumstance.



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