From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2023-02-07 13:50:42
Julien Blanc wrote:
> Le 2023-02-07 04:44, Peter Dimov via Boost a écrit :
>
> > In addition, it uses Boost.Describe to support C++ objects directly,
> > instead of some bespoke mechanism.
> >
> > One downside is that boost::json::value can't hold a lambda, so
> > lambdas are not supported.
>
> This raises another question. My current understanding is that the current
> process is:
>
> C++Object ---> Json representation (via describe) ---> Mustache
> rendering
>
> This means the mandatory creation of a json object. Is it only because
> json support as an input source is mandatory, and once you got it it is
> much simpler to use it, or are there other reasons which prevent doing
> the following:
>
> C++Object ---> Mustache rendering (via describe)
As-is, this would require the library to be templated with everything in
the header.
We've been thinking about a type `json::value_view` that is to `json::value`
what `string_view` is to `string` - a way to get a "reference" to a type
supported natively by `value_from` that looks like a `json::value` without
having to create a `json::value` temporary and copy everything.
We don't have agreement yet whether this type will be added to
Boost.JSON. If not, I'll need to implement it in Mustache.