From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-10-20 13:38:22
Erik Wien wrote:
> "Eric Niebler" <eric_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>> Such a one-size-fits-all unicode_string is guaranteed to be
>> inefficient for some applications.
> Yes... That's why I would like the encoding to be templated. Allowing
> the programmer to choose the encoding best suited for his/her needs.
It's good to have one string class for library interoperability reasons.
Otherwise library A would demand utf8_string, library B would demand
utf16_string, and library C would demand utf32_string. No matter which one
you choose, you'll pay a price. (This doesn't change even if you spell
utf8_string as string<utf8>.)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk