Boost logo

Boost :

From: Gennadiy Rozental (gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-04-02 11:27:38

> There's nothing wrong with that. It is std::basic_string's
> interface that provides for the use of a policy class. That
> std::char_traits happens to be the most appropriate -- it rarely
> isn't -- implementation of that policy is beside the point. You
> can argue that std::basic_string shouldn't have such a policy
> parameter, and you'd probably be right, but that's not
> std::char_traits' fault.

That's right. It's basic_string fault, which should've used char_traits by
name in basic_string implementation.

The only note to the char_traits design may be that compare method does not
nessesary belong to it.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at