Boost logo

Boost :

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-10-20 07:26:07

Peter Dimov wrote:

> Vladimir Prus wrote:
>> Eric Niebler wrote:
>>> No. "Normalization" doesn't always mean canonical decomposition.
>>> There are several canonical forms, some of which *require* the use of
>>> composite characters. In fact, the XML standard requires such a
>>> canonical form. A Unicode library cannot hide the issue of
>>> canonicalization from the user, because users will care which
>>> canonical form is being used.
>> Why? If I want to compare two string, I don't really care which
>> normalized form is used.
> But if you need a particular normalized form for other purposes (to store
> it into a database, perhaps), you have no way to obtain it from
> operator==.

Yes. But it's possible to have standalone "normalization" function, and
still use default normalized representation for the string class.

- Volodya

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