Re: [Boost-users] Report from Mont Tremblant C++ Committee meeting

From: Gennadiy Rozental (gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-11 16:11:34

"Thore Karlsen" <sid_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:iu8ok1hmslic94lbhhamat70j51r0u19ru_at_4ax.com...
> On Tue, 11 Oct 2005 15:59:23 -0400, "Gennadiy Rozental"
> <gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>>> Well, one thing I use it for is parsing HTTP directly in the read
>>> buffer, which is a vector. If the interfaces weren't generic, I'd either
>>> have to write my own functions to duplicate the functionality, or I'd
>>> have to copy the incoming data to a string. The first seems silly, and
>>> the latter would have unacceptable overhead in my case. The HTTP I'm
>>> parsing is streaming video from several dozen cameras at once, so I have
>>> to work with the buffers directly.
>>>
>>> I also use this library on plain old C strings, which wouldn't be
>>> possible if it were locked to basic_string.
>>>
>>> Some changes may make sense, but I really like the way it is now.
>
>>The way I see it all string algorithms should be using class like
>>const_string in their interfaces.
>
> Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but are you suggesting that no string
> algorithms should modify a string in-place? That would be unacceptable
> to me. I wouldn't use such a library.

Actually what I had in mind is similar to basic_cstring class I am using in 
Boost.Test, which supports both const and mutating versions. But most/many 
of string algorithms would use const version.

Gennadiy