Boost logo

Boost :

From: Arkadiy Vertleyb (vertleyb_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-10-12 13:59:51

"Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]> wrote

> Why? What would be wrong if we had a plethora of string types (eg:
> sgi::rope)
> to select from to meet our programming needs in different contexts? We
> have
> container types galore -- that's very useful. I think this sort of
> thinking is
> a contributor to a lack of C++ libraries....

I don't think there is such thing as "a lack of C++ libraries". It's just a
few _key_ libraries are missing.

> Honestly though, I think the advantages of using something other than
> std::string are minor. The main reason is that std::string is widely used
> in
> existing interfaces and code. So a core goal of the library is that you
> can
> use super_string in some code and then seamlessly pass that instance to
> existing interfaces written in terms of std::string for zero cost.

Not exactly... the cost would be runtime -- to allocate a copy of the
string. You wouldn't be able to pass anything other than "std::string" to
"const std::string&" without copying it first, would you?


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at