From: Martin Adrian (adrianm_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-10-13 15:08:22
Jeff Garland <jeff <at> crystalclearsoftware.com> writes:
> > Why is
> > boost::super_string ss(s)
> > ss.trim()
> > easier than
> > boost::trim(s)
> It isn't -- except which header do you include again?
Agree, but we don't need a super_string class to solve that. A new
header "boost/all_string_related_stuff.hpp" would be just as good.
> And you have to remember that half the functions you might use are free
> functions while the other half are member functions.
Agree, but that is not unique for strings or even C++. Is "sort" and "find"
member or free functions?
At one point there was a proposal to allow both syntaxes in future C++. Don't
know what happened to it.
An alternative solution would be to add a few more string_algo functions like
substr, find_* and all functions would be free just like in VB (begin, end,
size is already available via range)
> all the functions in one place. The signature for more advanced regex
> functions are much simpler with super_string. Many people don't even
> realize what's already in Boost (see other discussion in this thread).
But they will realize that super_string is available?
I agree that string functionality is scattered into severeal places with maybe
hard to find documentation but still don't understand why a new type is better
than combining and unifying the documentation?
(except that most of us programmers prefer to write code instead of
Why stop at super_string? Next step is collosal_super_string which combines
super_string with spirit, asio and sql.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk