Re: [boost] Re: copy_on_write

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
>> {
>> public:
>>
>>     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. ;-)