On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Chad Nelson <chad.thecomfychair@gmail.com>wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 17:22:50 +0000 "Phil Endecott" <spam_from_boost_dev@chezphil.org> wrote:
Chad Nelson wrote:
I reiterate my request from this message <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/214601>: would those interested in the UTF String library please comment on the new version?
It looks like you've started a new thread in the hope of "throwing Mathias off the scent".
More to leave the bad taste of the previous thread behind, for myself and other potential participants.
His tone has indeed been unusually aggressive and it would be good to get some other peoples' comments - but to me, it looks like he has made a fundamentally accurate analysis of your proposal.
Maybe so, I couldn't tell the good feedback from the bad.
For example, you have this "almost" random-access feature that, IIUC, for UTF-8 will give you O(1) random access if you have only ASCII characters and for UTF-16 will give you O(1) random access if you have only BMP characters. That's just horrible! [...]
If you put it that way, you're right. I assumed that the developer using the library would read the documentation and know that the iterators weren't always true random-access, but that assumption doesn't stand up to conscious examination.
Unfortunately, users tend not to read documentation. From my experience, many just using copy-paste from examples and modify the result to fit their needs. IMHO the default behavior should be the fastest from the most safest. But having an example of "tricky" usage to improve performance with the explanation of pros and cons will help some users to copy-paste from the right place and read documentation before they do so.
IMHO, if you want to add these features, they should be done in a way that prevents the user from accidentally misusing them. Rather than this drop-in replacement for std::string that misbehaves at run time, I would prefer something that requires some work to make it fit, but then behaves as expected.
Perhaps renaming the current iterator types to "fast_iterator", and making the standard iterators bidirectional ones? I'd hate to saddle all UTF strings with only bidirectional iterators when many of them can use the much faster random-access ones. -- Chad Nelson Oak Circle Software, Inc. * * *
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
-- *Vlad Lazarenko* *Lazarenko.me <http://lazarenko.me>* vlad@lazarenko.com <vlad@lazarenko.me>