"Robert Ramey" <ramey@rrsd.com> writes:
Then I wanted to compose them with a typedef
typedef boost::archive::iterators::insert_linebreaks< boost::archive::iterators::base64_from_binary< boost::archive::iterators::transform_width< const char *, 6, 8 > > ,72 ,const char // cwpro8 needs this > base64_text;
Wow - just great. Now just construct an instance of base64_text - and we're in business. So I can do:
char * address; // pointer to character buffer ... boost::archive::iterators::ostream_iterator<char> oi(os); std::copy( base64_text(address), base64_text( address + count ), oi );
Uh - oh - I can do the above - because I need to instanciate the iterator with some sort of make_???_iterator. This an extra pain and adds a lot of confusion It also prevents me from doing something like:
std::copy( wchar_from_mb(base64_text(address))), wchar_from_mb((base64_text( address + count )), oi );
should I find this convenient.
By adding the templated constructors and using them instead of make_???_functions I was able to achieve what I desired.
I've never been able to convince anyone else of the merit of the approach - but hope springs eternal.
Maybe you never articulated sufficiently clearly what you added to the basics provided by the iterator library, and why.
LOL - apparently so.
Thanks; I think I see why you need the templated ctors now. w.r.t. composing with a typedef, would boost::archive::iterators::insert_linebreaks< boost::archive::iterators::base64_from_binary< boost::archive::iterators::transform_width< const char *, 6, 8 >::type >::type ,72 ,const char // cwpro8 needs this >::type base64_text; be much worse, for your purposes? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com