Re: [boost] Interest in super string class?

From: Kon Lovett (klovett_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-02 13:28:35

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Jul 2, 2006, at 9:51 AM, David Abrahams wrote:

> Jeff Garland <jeff_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>> I've been working on a little project where I've had to doing lots  
>> of string
>> processing, so I decided to put together a string type that wraps up
>> boost.regex and boost.string_algo into a string type. I also  
>> remember a
>> discussion in the LWG about whether the various string algorithms  
>> should be
>> built in or not -- well consider this a test -- personally I find  
>> it easier
>> built into the string than as standalone functions.
>
> I appreciate the convenience of such an interface, I really do, but
> doesn't this design just compound the "fat interface" problems that
> std::string already has?
>
> Even Python's string, which has a *lot* built in, doesn't try to
> handle the regex stuff directly.

I smell Objective-C.

In which School of Philosophy is Boost?

Perhaps a 'convenience'  namespace where "fat" types can live.

>
> -- 
> Dave Abrahams
> Boost Consulting
> www.boost-consulting.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/ 
> listinfo.cgi/boost

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkSoAkMACgkQJJNoeGe+5O7VRwCeMhKwFWp0WmGSZIzX/Urw16Gz
o/gAn1vItpHIsNzLoJK/jmNqugChsX2G
=ZuF3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----