Boost logo

Boost :

From: Rainer Deyke (rdeyke_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-02-18 07:32:17

On 17.02.24 19:58, Дмитрий Архипов via Boost wrote:
> чт, 15 февр. 2024 г. в 01:43, g.peterhoff--- via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>:
>> My suggestion:
>> - Throw out boost::utility::string_view
>> - Make boost::core::detail::string_view public, just like all other backports in boost::core.
>> - Check if there are other multiple implementations. If so, pull them out into separate small boost libraries. (For databases, this would be called normalization, but it must not be over-normalized).
> I did not suggest replacing `string_view` with `core::string_view`
> because I know that neither has a superset of features. Because some
> libraries do use features `core::string_view`, replacing one with the
> other seems too disruptive. Sadly, most of this thread is a discussion
> of such replacement, and not what I was asking about.
> So, given that a replacement cannot happen today, should we make the
> type public so that I and other library maintainers could refer to it
> in the docs?

As an end user, I absolutely need to be aware of core::string_view, so I
absolutely want it documented. Automatic conversion to std::string_view
is useful, but it only happens in very limited contexts, so I can't just
pretend that a core::string_view is really a std::string_view.

Rainer Deyke (rainerd_at_[hidden])

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