Re: Interest in a Unicode library for Boost?

From: Gavin Lambert (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-10-30 23:19:36

On 31/10/2019 04:46, Zach Laine wrote:
> Where that breaks down is when you have not a function template that 
> uses certain aspects of a type, but a class template that represents a 
> set of types.  That case is different:
> 
> foo_template<T> foo; // <-- feel free to use the entire API
> 
> If the API is different for various values of T, such as it would be for 
> a text template that instantiates as string-like or rope-like (because 
> those have significantly different interfaces), that implies to me that 
> I should have two names in play -- one for the string version and one 
> for the rope version.  Otherwise, the result is super confusing for 
> someone reading or writing code using the unified name.

While I don't disagree with that, there is some precedent for it in the 
STL, namely future<void> having a different interface from other future<T>.

Although most of that is due to C++'s reluctance to treat void as an 
actual type.  (Though it does have some good features, such as explicit 
return void, that are lacking in some other languages.)