From: Alexander Nasonov (alnsn-mycop_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-03-06 05:27:17
Robert Klarer wrote:
> The syntax for declaring a static_string is unfortunate, but once it has
> been declared, a static_string's interface is (almost*) the same as that
> of a const std::string.
Yes, you right it's unfortunate and IMHO is not appropriate for a wide use.
> typedef boost::static_string<'s', 't', 'a', 't', 'i', 'c', '_'>
This syntax may be good for some specific (and not widely used) tasks such
as building hashing algorithm at compile-time for a given set of static
strings but not for "normal" strings.
I beveive it's better to wait for a new compiler which can optimize dynamic
memory allocations (a possibly even more) away.
-- Alexander Nasonov Remove minus and all between minus and at from my e-mail for timely response
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk