Re: [boost] charconv for C++11
On Wed, May 10, 2023, 19:42 Peter Dimov via Boost
Matt Borland wrote:
On May 10, 2023, at 5:42 PM, Dominique Devienne
wrote: On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 4:01 PM Matt Borland via Boost
wrote: [...] We use errno rather than std::error_code as specified in the standard.
Hi. Sounded like a good candidate for Boost.Compat (or Boost.Polyfill), discussed recently, until that sentence. I'm lucky enough to be able to use C++17 at work, but if I was on C++11, I'd tend to use such a library C++until I could use the std one, so deviations like this would complicate adoption because moving to std would then be harder. My $0.02. —DD
Dominique,
Thanks for the response. We discussed Boost.Compat but decided it is outside of the scope. For instance <latch> is what set off the discussion and it can be implemented in ~100 LOC. This implementation of charconv will be around 10k LOC so it should be in its own library. If the demand signal is to use std::error_code instead of errno we can make the change.
boost/charconv.hpp was initially supposed to be a very light header (with only a few declarations), but since from/to_chars for integral types were moved to the headers because of constexpr,
What is the connection between constexpr and moving things to headers? Regards, &rzej; that's no longer the case, so we can
probably afford the inclusion of
without anyone noticing. (Note that std::from/to_chars use std::errc, not std::error_code.)
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Andrzej Krzemienski wrote:
What is the connection between constexpr and moving things to headers?
The fact that constexpr functions can't be separately compiled and need to be defined in the header? (from/to_chars for integrals are constexpr in C++23.)
participants (2)
-
Andrzej Krzemienski
-
Peter Dimov