-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 95
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
replace boost lexical cast with stl string #195
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
replace boost lexical cast with stl string #195
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Michael T. Wells <[email protected]>
per @JeffGarland recommendation, std::stoul() is a c++11 feature and will need to use |
@@ -15,7 +15,6 @@ | |||
#include <iterator> | |||
#include <algorithm> | |||
#include <boost/tokenizer.hpp> | |||
#include <boost/lexical_cast.hpp> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So here we should ifdef the include so that if we're supporting pre-11 c++ we will just keep using lexical cast probably the cleanest solution is to move it to the compiler_config.hpp to do the macro check. I looked and can't specific feature macro for these functions so I think I'd go with
BOOST_NO_CXX11
boost.config is already included so you should have direct access to this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Excellent!
...clarifying question...
Is the goal to totally eliminate the dependency on boost/lexical_cast? If so then we could use cstdlib
for < c++11
and string
for >= c++11
.
Or is the goal simply to modernize the code? If so we can use the macro approach you mentioned for < c++11
and leave the dependency on boost::lexical_cast
.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm fine sticking with lexical_cast for 03 compiles and just modernizing for 11 and beyond. It seems likely I'll eventually drop 03 support.
@@ -15,7 +15,6 @@ | |||
#include <iterator> | |||
#include <algorithm> | |||
#include <boost/tokenizer.hpp> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I forgot about this one as well -- probably this will be next on my radar.
@@ -61,7 +60,7 @@ namespace date_time { | |||
inline unsigned short | |||
month_str_to_ushort(std::string const& s) { | |||
if((s.at(0) >= '0') && (s.at(0) <= '9')) { | |||
return boost::lexical_cast<unsigned short>(s); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
so my suggestion is we write the function
#ifdef BOOST_NO_CXX11
inline unsigned short string_to_ushort(...)
{
--> current lexical cast
}
#else
inline unsigned short string_to_ushort(...)
{
--> current stoul code
}
#endif
This can live here or if it's used elsewhere I'd move it to compiler_config.hpp since its a work around
I was able to kick the ci |
And sorta obviously the at least the 03 compiles aren't happy with those functions. |
- string when < c++11 - lexical_cast when >=c++11 Signed-off-by: Michael T. Wells <[email protected]>
Looking good -- let's see what the CI sez. |
- TODO: lexical cast called because of unknown needed side effect for gregorian tests Signed-off-by: Michael T. Wells <[email protected]>
return boost::lexical_cast<unsigned short>(s); | ||
#else | ||
// TODO: lexical cast has some side effect on <s> that makes the std::stoul work here | ||
boost::lexical_cast<unsigned short>(s); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@JeffGarland This line should be removed, but i was curious how it would run in CI. In my local environment, the tests pass when the lexical_cast
is called on s
, but fail when it is not called. There is some side effect of boost::lexical_cast
on s
that I don't understand in the current date_time uninttests. In particular this test i have been looking at here fails without doing this cast.
@wellsmt rebase on develop for a complete CI scan |
The purpose of this request to replace the dependency on boost::lexical cast with std string conversions for
c++ >= c++11
and leaveboost::lexical_cast
for< c++11
.Signed-off-by: Michael T. Wells [email protected]