From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-04 17:31:05
Edward Diener wrote:
> I pointed out what I thought was the only bad design decision in
> std::string, but it's a done deal already and the mavens of C++
> evidently want to support C idioms for the life of the language so who
> am I to object.
I didn't respond earlier, but I agree with you on this point. Without the C
influence std::string could be trimmer.
> Other than that, the much-maligned design of std::string
> is actually excellent, but that shouldn't stop anyone else from adding
> new functionality to a derived class and jeff has elegantly done so.
> Thanks Jeff !
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk