On Thursday, June 5, 2003, at 8:26 AM, Ed Brey wrote:
[SNIP]
* Stream-buffer-wrapping Streams motivation: Why would someone want
an internal buffer (versus independent buffers as used by standard
streams)? (Example, please.)
The basic stream (template) classes support attaching a stream buffer
Daryle Walker wrote:
>>> I fixed up the I/O library I had reviewed a few months ago. It was
>>> some little things last week, but some big documentation and testing
>>> this week. It's in the sandbox if you want to try it out.
>>
>> Looking at today's version in the sandbox, I still see the foll
Daryle,
On Thursday 05 June 2003 01:28, Daryle Walker wrote:
>
> Actually, that reason isn't accurate. The '\n' is an expression of
> type char, and all output streams can print a char object with operator
> <<, even if the stream's character type isn't char. (The stream will
> secretly call th
On Tuesday, June 3, 2003, at 9:19 AM, Thomas Witt wrote:
[SNIP]
To me there are basically two reasons that make newl desirable beside
the formatting issue.
[SNIP]
2. IIUC the difference between a character and a manipulator is that
the manipulator is not tied to the streams character type. So fo
On Monday, June 2, 2003, at 12:21 PM, Ed Brey wrote:
Daryle Walker wrote:
I fixed up the I/O library I had reviewed a few months ago. It was
some little things last week, but some big documentation and testing
this week. It's in the sandbox if you want to try it out.
Looking at today's version
PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Thomas Witt
| Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 8:19 AM
| To: Boost mailing list
| Subject: Re: [boost] Re: I/O library status
|
|
|
| Hi,
|
| On Monday 02 June 2003 19:21, Ed Brey wrote:
| > * newl differs from '\n' only in that newl doesn't
Hi,
On Monday 02 June 2003 19:21, Ed Brey wrote:
> * newl differs from '\n' only in that newl doesn't perform background
> formatting. Presumably one would choose to use newl to avoid the
> formatting. What is undesirable about '\n' being formatted?
To me there are basically two reasons that m
Daryle Walker wrote:
> I fixed up the I/O library I had reviewed a few months ago. It was
> some little things last week, but some big documentation and testing
> this week. It's in the sandbox if you want to try it out.
Looking at today's version in the sandbox, I still see the following high-l
I fixed up the I/O library I had reviewed a few months ago. It was
some little things last week, but some big documentation and testing
this week. It's in the sandbox if you want to try it out.
Besides an altered "boost/io_fwd.hpp" and "libs/io/doc/index.html", we
got:
boost/io/array_stream.h
