I don't really se the need for the converting get functions.
Why is pt.get<double>(path) better than lexical_cast<double>(pt.get(path)). (or string_to or atof)
There will be problems with non-throwing failure handling. Users will be forced to write something like that: double d; try { d = boost::lexical_cast<double>(pt.get(path, default_value)); } catch (boost::bad_lexical_cast &) { d = default_value; } instead of just: double d = pt.get(path, default_value); Even if failure handling is not an issue, explicit use of lexical_cast forces uses to do one extra include, and writing: boost::lexical_cast<int>(pt.get("path")); // #1 instead of: pt.get<int>(path); // #2 Which in my opinion is much less readable. 95% of uses will do type conversion anyway (that comes from my personal experience with the library), so forcing users to write #1 instead of #2 in all these cases will do no good. Also, user can use lexical_cast now if he really wants to: int n = boost::lexical_cast<int>(pt.get<std::string>("path")); Best regards, Marcin