2 Jul
2017
2 Jul
'17
6:34 p.m.
On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Mike Gresens via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
As a user I'd prefer not to have string_body as a distinct type too. Same for string_view_body. Both are tightly bounded to distinct types.
To be clear, Peter was asking why not `response<std::string>` which is a different but legitimate question. There are design reasons why `std::string` cannot be a choice for Body.
So with a concept of "character sequence" we could introduce a "sequence_body" working with models like std::string, std::string_view, boost::string_ref, std::vector<char>, etc.
What do you propose replacing this declaration with? response<string_body> req; Thanks