Re: [boost] Interest in super string class?

From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-03 22:40:25

Shunsuke Sogame wrote:
> Jeff Garland wrote:
>
> Apart from optimization, the future (under range proposal)
> 'to_upper' might be:
> 
>      std::vector<char> const rng;
>      std::string dst(rng|to_upper);

Sorta hard for me to anticipate the future ;-) Anyway, I assume rng can be an 
std::string as well?

> The following is possible today:
> 
>      std::string dst = range_construct(rng|to_upper);
>      range_copy(rng|to_upper|to_lower|to_upper, dst);
> 
> Note that '|to_upper' is lazy.

I have no idea what this code does?  Construct a range from chars that have 
been upper-cased and write it into dst.  Then copy the rng to while converting 
it to upper, then lower, then upper?  This one isn't winning me over with code 
clarity...

> Well, IMHO, I prefer free-functions for another readability:
> 
>      ::CString rng;
>      boost::to_upper(rng);
> 
>      std::vector<char> rng;
>      boost::to_upper(rng);
> 
>      super_string str;
>      str.to_upper(); // !

In the zero/one argument case there's no significant advantage.  So I'll 
repeat this case again:

     std::string s1("foo");
     std::string s2("bar);
     std::string s3("foo");
     //The next line makes me go read the docs again, every time
     replace_all(s1,s2,s3);  //which string is modified exactly?
or
     s1.replace_all(s2, s3);  //obvious which string is modified here

Of course, you want to be able to work consistently so you have to pull along 
the functions with less arguments too.

Jeff