Re: [boost] Boost super_string

From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-10-12 22:54:55

Arkadiy Vertleyb wrote:
> "Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]> wrote

> Still, does it really seem like a good idea to do what the designers of the
> STL wanted to explicitly disallow...  

I don't believe any such intent was ever expressed by the standard 
committee.  It's true that they explicitly avoided virtual functions in 
the standard library -- iostreams excepted.  It's really Scott Meyers 
advice that drives the 'never inherit' from a base w/o a virtual 
destructor.  As much as I generally agree with that advice the 
'stateless' functional extension is a useful and portable technique in 
my experience.

> Why not define additional
> functionality externally? (I believe there was once a library in the Boost
> review queue called string_algo, or similar).  This would be a better design
> choice, IMO.

Ah, string_algo is part of boost and super_string uses it in the 
implementation just like it uses boost.regex and boost.format.  It might 
be informative for you to go back and read the earlier email thread.

http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2006/07/107087.php

Jeff