Hi On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 09:15:58AM +0400, Vladimir Prus wrote:
[snip] > I'll keep this in mind. In fact, I plan to convert all the documentation > into BoostBook is the library is accepted. The Doxygen is very nice --- in > fact, it helps very much to keep everything documented. But I found it > rather limiting for writing various "overview" pages. Hope new > documentation will be better. Great. > > * Validation > > > > Library allows to supports validation and parsing of option parameters, > > but I thinks it is rather limited. It is possible to define > > user-specific behaviour, but it would be helpful, if some common > > formats would be suported. > > > > For instance: > > * Various integer types ( not just int ) with boundary checking. > > Something like > > paramter<int>( "count", 1, 4, &count ) // 1-Min and 4-Max > > value > > It's funny that the very first prototype version had this facility. In > surely can be added to the current version if there's such need. > > I like the idea proposed by Tanton. po::parameter should have a validation predicate as an argument. A reasonable set of arguments can be provided by library, and the user can always provide a specific ones. > > * Format specification and checking for string. Regex specification > > of something like scanf would be nice. > > This can be useful for example to check if the parameter is a > > filename. > > Could you clarify a bit how scanf-like specification can work? You mean it > can be used to specify syntax? > I mean something like "%02.4f" or something like that... it is just an idea. If there would be a validation predicate as an argument, regex library can be used to define regex predicate which would cover most of the cases. > > * Environment & Others > > > > The library tries to unify the access to program options from command > > line and from ini files. This is very nice feature because it is > > removing the need for doing generaly the same thing twice. It would be > > nice if some other sources of paramers could be incorporated as well. > > Particulary the enviromnmet is often used to exchange arguments. Given > > the fact that it consist of a set of pairs "variable=value" it is very > > similar to the ini file and so it souldn't be hard to implement. > > Thanks for the suggestion! It's quite right. > > > For windows platform the registry comes to play as another source of > > options. > > Yep, that source was considered as alternative from the very start. I've > seen some project start with a command line, then add config files and then > need registry on Windows. Registry is not yet supported because I wanted to > find out if there's support to the idea of uniform access to all > configuration means. I definitely like the idea of the uniform access. It would be only welcome if the library can cover more sources of options. Pavol _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
