From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-05 11:09:30
> Speaking strictly of strings, I think this is the main problem.
> Maybe beginning by writing a doc that teaches simply what can be done on
> strings, using all boost libs would be the better thing to do?
I suppose someone could write a nice article about this, but my goal was also
to make my resulting code look cleaner. When I'm looking at the code 3 months
later I'm not really that interested which Boost library implements...just
what it does.
> The second step might be to wrap all that features in free functions (I
> wonder why there isn't a namespace boost::string_algo that provides all
> supports for strings), and maybe the third to have a class that provides a
There is, but it's a library that provides most of the functions super_string
> Maybe I'm not super user enough to have a good point on this, but at least,
> you can be sure I'm not a lazy developer and reading docs is my hobby. I
> feel weird realizing that I missed a lot of strings features from boost.
Well, if nothing else, this discussion might lead you to look at parts of
Boost you were missing out on :-)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk