Subject: Re: [boost] [string] proposal
From: Dean Michael Berris (mikhailberis_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-24 00:13:57
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 11:51 AM, David Bergman
> On Jan 23, 2011, at 9:34 PM, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
>> I think I disagree with this. A string is by definition a sequence of
>> something -- a string of integers, a string of events, a string of
>> characters. Encoding is not an intrinsic property of a string.
> Ok... it feels like you are changing the rules as we play, instead of admitting "defeat" ;-)
> Or, did you indeed talk about *generic sequences* this whole time? If so, why the focus on encoding strategies for characters?
I've always been pointing out that strings should just be immutable
and agnostic of the encoding and have the encoding enforced externally
to the string.
Are you confusing me for someone else?
My assertion has been from the beginning:
1. Let's focus on a string class first that is (arguably) better than
std::string by making it efficient, immutable, and does proper value
2. Once we have this then let's build upon it to allow for multiple
ways of interpreting the *contents* of the string.
I'm inclined to think you're confusing me for someone else while
replying to my message above.
-- Dean Michael Berris about.me/deanberris
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk