Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [string] proposal
From: David Bergman (David.Bergman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-27 12:54:53

On Jan 27, 2011, at 8:24 AM, Matus Chochlik wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Dean Michael Berris
> <mikhailberis_at_[hidden]> wrote:


>> And IMHO std::string's current interface can be deprecated by a
>> suitably convinced standard committee.
> And IMHO this will happen only if you, besides the new
> string, have also invented a mind-control death-ray :)

LOL! Yes, I think one has to penetrate the minds of old CS/Engineering farts a little more before expressing such (hopeful?) beliefs. We are not "Ruby crazy" having no problem changing the rules at a whim, breaking old code. We care about and cherish old stuff :-)

>> It's like std::auto_ptr being deprecated along with the interfaces of
>> dozens of other libraries. If boost::string is a really well
>> implemented string that does things really really well, then I don't
>> see why std::string can't be deprecated in favor of an arguably better
>> but certainly different string paradigm.
> No, std::auto_ptr is/was nowhere near std::string when considering
> the "frequency of usage".
>>> 1. Make it fully backward compatible with std::string
>>> 2. Call it by different name.
> +1

+1 here as well


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