Re: A base64 library?

From: Ruben Perez (rubenperez038_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-03-20 11:46:05

> I think, a BaseN library (with N being at least 16 and 64) with high
> performance (i.e. with SIMD support) and configurability would be
> useful. The particular points of configuration and capabilities I'm
> interested in:

Looks like the two more widespread bases. Seems reasonable.

> - Character set. For Base16 - upper or lower-case letters. For Base64 -
> normal or URL-safe[1] character set.

Definitely.

> - For Base64, whether to include trailing padding on encoding.

This is actually one of the requirements that motivated me to think of
this project.

> - For decoding, support error indication via exception or an error code.

And this is the other one. I might go with system::result, which joins
the best of the two worlds.

> - Support output into an externally provided buffer. This also implies
> that the library must provide means to estimate the size of that buffer
> for a given input. Support for output in unallocated buffer (e.g. via
> std::back_inserter) is also welcome, but not a strong requirement.

Yes, that's mandatory. I'm not convinced of the std::back_inserter one, though.

> - Zero allocation, context-less mode. I.e. a function taking inputs and
> outputs and doing the whole job in one go.

Seems reasonable, too.

> I would be interested in a Boost library, not a standalone version.
>
> There are plenty implementations out there (for example, in OpenSSL), so
> the proposed library will need to have a comparison, including
> performance, with popular alternatives in the docs.

I attempted to use the OpenSSL implementation and found it quite frustrating.

Regards,
Ruben.