From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-01 17:33:09
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> Peter Dimov wrote:
> [... regarding (busted) 21.3/5 ...]
>> My point was that a COW-friendly class should have had
>> class cow_friendly_string
>> char get( int i ) const;
>> void set( int i, char ch );
>> sidestepping the above problem.
> I take it that you'd like to sorta castrate "cow_unfriendly_string"
> (the standard one) to make it more user (read: looser) friendly. ;-)
No, I was just saying that some interfaces are more COW-friendly than
others, that's all. Designing a good std::string is hard and not on my list
of issues at the moment. ;-)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk