Message du 16/04/11 09:30 De : "Vicente BOTET" A : boost@lists.boost.org Copie à : Objet : Re: [boost] [locale] Review. Internationalization library?
Message du 16/04/11 08:04 De : "Vicente BOTET" A : boost@lists.boost.org Copie à : Objet : [boost] [locale] Review. Internationalization library?
As the review period has been extended, I will try to review at least the documentation.
I guess this has already been discussed, so if it is the case, please could you give me the pointer?
Instead of providing new datetime, calendars classes I would preferred that you propose the needed modification to Boost.DateTime library, so it can be used in an internationalization context.
Why have you preferred to redo Boost.DateTime?
If the DateTime library is redone, shouldn't it be released as a separated one, DateTime2?
Do your classes preserve the same interface than Boost.DateTime?
If not, does the documentation show the differences in a specific section? If we follow the Chrono design, shouldn't the calendar be a template parameter of the dattime class? What about rewriting the following date_time some_point = period::year * 1995 + period::january + period::day*1; as date_time some_point = year(1995) + january + day(1); ? Why your datatime class output by default as a number? Why there is no a default format? Best, Vicente