From: Gennaro Prota (gennaro_prota_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-03 14:01:37
On Sun, 02 Jul 2006 11:51:32 -0700, Jeff Garland
>David Abrahams wrote:
>>> 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?
>Yes, that's partially the point :-)
just to be sure I understood: *the* two reasons for such a class are:
(a) helping novices (b) having a cleaner (whatever that means) syntax.
Sorry if I'm missing something or oversimplifying the issue. It seems
to me that (a) is a secondary point, as being a novice is something
deemed to disappear asap if you want to seriously program in C++; (b)
is very nicely obtained with Shunsuke's proposal, which seems to get
the best of the two worlds: power and syntactical convenience (BTW,
Shunsuke, is the code in the vault?).
-- [ Gennaro Prota, C++ developer for hire ] [ resume: available on request ]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk