Using a real parser generator to parse numbers (and dates)
mstahl at redhat.com
Thu Mar 1 03:40:44 PST 2012
On 01/03/12 12:14, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> On 02/29/2012 06:41 PM, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 02:57:09PM +0100, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
>>> Note that the stable sal interface historically stays clear of
>>> boost, because of differences in the various boost versions
>>> available in the various environments.
>> OK, two prongs:
>> 1) Use of boost in rtl/ustring.hxx
>> But this is completely header-only code, so no ABI probl...^W Ah
>> no, you are right; if the size or memory layout of a
>> boost::u16_to_u32_iterator changes, there will be problems when
>> passing a const_iterator between old binaries and new binaries.
> Even if it were header-only, it would not work with the current setup
> (where the SDK does not include any boost headers).
>> So here's the patch for a boost-free OUString, with manually
>> implemented const_iterator.
> Which is a bit of a pain, for sure. Would it be an option to extract
> const_iterator and begin/end from OUString to outside the URE interface
> (see below) and use some sort of adapter around OUString in those places
> that expect it to support begin/end?
see also stlunosequence.hxx:
> Another option would be to allow boost in the URE interface (hence the
> "historically" above), but that would require some thought/work.
sounds like an awful idea, i've had bad experiences with incompatibly
changing boost stuff in the past... i'd rather not have us in the
position to be forced to use an outdated boost at some time in the
future to retain compatibility (cf. STLport mess).
More information about the LibreOffice