Subject: Re: [boost] [review] string convert
From: Vicente BOTET (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-05-07 08:38:24
> Message du 06/05/11 02:58
> De : "Vladimir Batov"
> A : boost_at_[hidden]
> Copie à :
> Objet : Re: [boost] [review] string convert
>
> > Vicente BOTET wanadoo.fr> writes:
> > ..
> > I suspect that these complex classes you are talking off don't define the
> > input/ouput stream operator to work with your conversion framework.
>
> Jeez, is it really that hard to accept that 'convert' works and is used with
> many classes complex or not. Say, a Train class is complex as it has a *lot* of
> stuff. We serialize/unserialize the class to/from XML using 'convert'. Train has
> op>>() op<<().
>
> > The classes I expect to be used are regular classes with value semantics.
>
> Our classes with value- and pointer-semantics (pimpl-based) are as
> regular/normal. They just happen to be not your classes.
When I used regular classes I was not referring to normal or abnormal classes, but what Adobe ASL and Stepanov call regular types. Sorry for the imprecision.
You can assimilate a regular class as one that behaves like a built-in type. But, please see http://www.google.fr/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CBwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.94.3881%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&rct=j&q=regular%20type%20c%2B%2B%20stepanov%20programming&ei=AjrFTbqaHs22hAfd8-H2Aw&usg=AFQjCNGejAW7Pq59laUIqx6CqJNlRKc--g&sig2=rPtYF_ZvlWVUX_SYEempqA&cad=rja
for more information) or google for Fundamentals of Generic Programming, regular types, Stepanov.
Best,
Vicente