"Reece Dunn" wrote
But the solution is still using templates. You don't need to have a template to use std::[w]string. Thus, if you wanted to move:
__declspec(dllexport) void some_function( const std::string & str );
to use fixed_string with the implementation you mention, you would need to expose the implementation of some_function to your customers and thus cannot use it as part of a library (.lib) or DLL.
The limitations of templates are widely known. The advantages are too. If the advantages dont appear in this case then there is little point in using templates. If it needs to be implementable as part of a DLL then it obviously cant practically have compile time fixed capacity, but that is the trade off you have to make ( OTOH maybe you could instantiate a few useful sizes, so maybe its not impossible). It strikes me that the design radically changed midstream and you now have a strange hybrid. This is the source of a lot of confusion with the result that potential users throw up their hands and move on. Are you designing a string with a compile time fixed size or are you dessigning a string with a construction time fixed capacity, if so then why not a runtime variable capacity? What requirements must the class satisfy? What are the limitations imposed by these requirements? What then are the advantages over std::string etc, etc. regards Andy Little