Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] About Handler::log()

[Emre T. <emr...@gm...>]

Hi Dean,

While looking at the documentation I see that the handler is originally designed to be a function object.
That's nice, so the application developer can:

- Provide a function if the case is a simple one, or
- If the implementation needs state information, provide a class with a function call operator overloaded.

However, the call to the Handler::log() brakes that simplicity, the handler is forced to be a class.
Below are the possible solutions to this problem, with each having their own pro & cons (mostly taste related).

1. Provide an extra error argument to the function.
2. Handler::log() assumption is fine, let's force the implementation to be a class with specific
     handle_data() and handle_error() functions.
3. Provide 2 different handler functions, one for data and one for error.

So I have provided an interface to handle all. I think being easy is nothing to do with this.
Here, the interface to the application developer is easy, and the implementation is a little
bit complicated.

By the way there is no need of the template argument Handler in this implementation.

On Mar 20, 2011, at 12:04 PM, Dean Michael Berris wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 9:22 PM, Emre Türkay <emr...@gm...> wrote:
>> Hi Dean.
>> 
>> What do you say about this interface? Take a look at the various possible handlers.
>> 
> 
> Hmmm... I don't understand what you're trying to accomplish here. Care
> to elaborate? If it's just a matter of providing an error handler,
> that should be really *easy* and not this complicated. I appreciate
> the code, but I don't know what problem you're trying to solve here.
> 
> -- 
> Dean Michael Berris
> http://about.me/deanberris