on Sun Feb 08 2009, Gennaro Prota <gennaro.prota-AT-yahoo.com> wrote:
David Abrahams wrote:
on Mon Feb 02 2009, Alexander Nasonov <alnsn-AT-yandex.ru> wrote:
Vladimir Batov <batov <at> people.net.au> writes:
With no volunteeres coming forward , I am considering extending the lexical_cast interface as described below. Is there any chance of that change integrated? I'm againt this change. See my other messages in this thread for details.
I am too. Vladimir, I believe the functionality you want is badly needed, but it shouldn't be part of lexical_cast. lexical_cast is conceptually simple and should remain that way.
lexical_cast was at best an experiment. In some limited contexts a generic from_string and a generic to_string might make sense. But a generic from/to anything, using a string as intermediate representation, is something done just because it can be done, not because it is useful or meaningfully specified.
Yes, that's what I've been saying. I don't particularly like the idea of lexical_cast, and trying to stretch it to cover cases it wasn't designed for will just put more important functionality in that bucket.
I quacke at the idea that it is being used in a mission-critical project.
IMO that's an overreaction, but anyway...
The proper interface for the functionality you seek should be considered without reference to lexical_cast.
In fact, if we put together all the badly needed functionality that overlaps with lexical_cast, and give it appropriate interfaces, I'm not entirely convinced that there would be much use for lexical_cast anymore.
There isn't really much use anyway. It gives no control over the format or, for that matters, over anything.
...I think you're just making my point for me. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com