On 10/04/2011 14:25, Artyom wrote:
line 150: I think sresult.append(out_start, out_ptr); would be slightly clearer.
I should look on it carefully whether I can change this.
iconv API is very gentle in how it handles its pointers and states so I need to do everything carefully.
Also I assume that append(Begin,End) may be less efficient then append(pointer,size) as it may be naively implemented as
while(begin!=end) s += *begin++;
Why make such assumptions that could very well be unfounded when it only makes your code harder to understand?
I don't think so. I don't think that
append(str,size)
is less readable then
append(str_begin,str_end)
I didn't read the incriminated piece of code, I was just inferring from Steven's comment that it could be clearer. If it's just this indeed there is no difference in clarity.