Re: [lmi] Dealing with deleted operator<<() overloads for wide char types in C++20

[Greg Chicares]

On 3/2/21 11:47 PM, Vadim Zeitlin wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Mar 2021 22:51:41 +0000 Greg Chicares <gchicares@sbcglobal.net> 
> wrote:
> 
> [...discussion snipped...[
> GC> Both points of view are valid, but if you call yours "more
> GC> constructive", I can call mine "purer" as I would introduce
> GC> no novel concept.
> 
>  I completely agree with everything above.

We should found a Leibnizian political party and name it "Calculemus".

> GC> Is there an extremely simple and robust lmi_test::to_string()
> GC> implementation that you have in mind? If so, I wouldn't want
> GC> to dismiss it sight unseen.
> 
>  I don't have time to submit a proper[ly tested] patch today, but the
> implementation I had in mind would just use std::ostringstream, i.e. rely
> on the same overloaded operator<<(std::ostream&, T) which is used right
> now, by default. If you'd like, I could provide such patch later this week,
> it should be relatively small even though not completely trivial (if only
> because we need this to_string() in a couple of different places and I'm
> not sure if we want to call it from both of them or try refactoring the
> code slightly to avoid duplicating it).
> 
>  Please let me know if I should [not] do this,

Sounds good. No rush.