Re: [boost] Proposal: static_string library

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-03-06 15:54:14

At 05:58 PM 3/5/2003, Robert Klarer wrote:

 >There's already been some discussion of this library under the thread
 >"Proposal: strings as template parameters," but static_string hasn't
 >been the subject of its own thread, so I'm starting this one.  I'd like
 >to solicit opinions about this project.  Is it worthwhile?
 >
 >The purpose of the static_string library is to offer an alternative to
 >string literals and the standard type const std::string.  A
 >static_string uses no dynamically allocated memory, and is more
 >efficient at execution time than either string literals or
 >basic_strings.

Yes, agreed. That would be useful. IIRC, the C++ committee's performance 
working groups has talked about such a string in the past.

But...

 >The syntax for declaring a static_string is unfortunate...
 >
 >  boost::static_string<'s', 't', 'a', 't', 'i', 'c', '_'> StrType1;

Unfortunate? Is that one of those understatement jokes Canadians are known 
for? I'd say it is way worse that "unfortunate" - it is ugly and error 
prone.

Lack of internationalization support is also a serious concern.

There are questions that come to mind:

* Can you come up with a small, workable language extension that eases 
those problems?

* Can you come up with an alternate design that gives up a tiny bit of 
efficiency (one pointer indirection perhaps) but then allows reasonable 
construction and internationalization?

Wondering-out-loud,

--Beman