Re: [boost] Re: [Unicode strings] We're off

From: Felipe Magno de Almeida (felipe.almeida_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-18 14:34:24

Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> Sundell Software wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 13:16:24 -0500, Miro Jurisic <macdev_at_[hidden]> 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I believe that the question of why basic_string is not a suitable 
>>> Unicode
>>> abstraction has been answered adequately in this thread, but to 
>>> summarize:
>>> numerous basic_string methods would allow the client to violate 
>>> invariants set
>>> by the Unicode standard.
>>
>>
>>
>> The client would not be using the basic_string directly to manipulate
>> the unicode character string, although he would have access to the
>> basic_string. If the client chooses to shoot themselves in the foot,
>> they can. But any operation on the string as a string of characters
>> would be done through another interface.
> 
> 
> So what's the advantage of using std::basic_string over, say, std::vector ?

reference counting optimization and maybe others, where there is.

> 
> Regards,
>         Stefan
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: 
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
> 

-- 
    Felipe Magno de Almeida
    UIN: 2113442
     email: felipe.almeida at ic unicamp br, felipe.m.almeida at gmail 
com, felipe at synergy com
I am a C, modern C++, MFC, ODBC, Windows Services, MAPI developer
from synergy, and Computer Science student from State
University of Campinas(UNICAMP).
To know more about:
Unicamp: http://www.ic.unicamp.br
Synergy: http://www.synergy.com.br
current work: http://www.mintercept.com