Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] Merge to Trunk, Preparing for the Pain

[Kim G. <kim...@gm...>]

Hi Dean,

On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 11:10, Dean Michael
Berris<mik...@gm...> wrote:
>
> Kim's attempt was more of an OO approach (please correct me if I'm
> wrong Kim), something that I felt was too "simple" and could also be
> done with just static polymorphism.

Yes, that's a fair assessment.

> My approach is almost different from any approach that I've seen taken
> as far as URL parsing is concerned -- using template functions and
> template classes and a generic programming approach to specific URL
> parsing. However mine is not as close to the RFC as I'd like, and is
> not as well tested as I'd like either.
>
> Can us three gentlemen work together towards: 1) Adding better test
> coverage 2) Implementing the details of the RFC and 3) Merging what we
> can towards something that works and is release-ready?

I'd love to help with the tests, but we've just had our second child
and life with two kids doesn't leave much time for hacking :-) Let me
see if I can help out, but don't count on it.

Quick question -- parse_specific seems to be a function template that
you specialize on the Range and Tag. I thought specializing function
templates was frowned upon, e.g. [1]...? Plus, as I understand it, you
can't partially specialize it (reuse code parsers for one Range over
several Tags). Can't you use simple overloading to get the same
result? I can't claim to understand it in detail, I just browsed the
code quickly, but this jumped out at me.

Thanks,
- Kim

[1] http://www.gotw.ca/publications/mill17.htm