Re: [boost] SuperString v2 in the vault

From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-12 23:26:32

Tomas wrote:
> I find your improvements over string class interface very valuable. Is there 
> any hope to incorporate these changes directly into basic_string in the 
> future C++ standard? 

Faint, I'd say.  If you've been following the reaction, you'll know that this 
is a tough area to get agreement.  I don't know if there's enough support to 
get it included in Boost and if you can't get the library into Boost it 
doesn't bode well for the committee.

> I mean it's fine we now have super_string class but the 
> fact we have two string classes for the same thing is confusig. And if 
> super_string is superset and better than std::string why not replace it?

Even if you could get agreement that super_string is better than string, 
someone has to write a paper for the committee suggesting this.  Many of the 
string algorithms that super_string uses have been proposed for TR2, but I'm 
not sure where they stand.  I put super_string out there because it's useful 
to me and I thought it would be useful to have a discussion about it.  I don't 
have time to write a paper to propose it to the committee, but if someone 
wanted to do that I'd be fine with it.  But beware, there's a good chance it's 
a waste of time.

Jeff