Subject: Re: [boost] [lexical-cast] version of lexical_cast in 1.46.1 is quite older than in trunk
From: Vicente BOTET (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-04-07 02:00:32
> Message du 07/04/11 00:49
> De : "Vladimir Batov"
> A : boost_at_[hidden]
> Copie à :
> Objet : Re: [boost] [lexical-cast] version of lexical_cast in 1.46.1 is quite older than in trunk
>
> > Antony Polukhin gmail.com> writes:
> > ...
> > Added some optimizations for casts to integral types ( you can see
> > them in tickets #5417 and #5350).
> > Did not used strtol/strtod (it will be hard to implement tags/ios
> > flags if we`ll use them, hard to detect overflows), did not used
> > spirit library (it`s too big, includes too many files, and looks like
> > it`s API changes often).
>
> Various limitations of and extension requests to the existing lexical_cast
> persistently (and understandably) keep popping up on this list. Quite some time
> back now I myself was requesting a few features added to it and thought it'd be
> relatively straightforward. Back then I was explained by Kevlin Henney (the
> lexical_cast author) and Alexander Nasonov (the current maintainer) that the
> requested features were spilling over the original lexical_cast design concept
> and, essentially, lexical_cast was closed for extension business (or so I
> understood). That resulted in lengthy discussions (search for [convert] in
> archives) where to go and how to proceed and in the end the decision has been
> made to essentially branch off or to break free or to start fresh (whatever
> one's preference might be) and now there has been the Convert proposal sitting
> in the queue and getting ready for the review this month. I'd suggest anyone
> interested in additional lexical_cast features to have a look the the proposal
> if it already satisfies your needs. If not, then it's most definitely open for
> improvements/extensions/ideas/etc.
It will be great to have a performance comparison between your library and lexical cast (with a without the proposed modifications) as one of the major concerns of your library were to provide an interface that performs better than lexical_cast.
Maybe Antony can provide the program he used to make the comparison before and after the patch
Best,
Vicente