Stefan Seefeld wrote:
Sundell Software wrote:
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 13:16:24 -0500, Miro Jurisic <macdev@meeroh.org> wrote:
I believe that the question of why basic_string is not a suitable Unicode abstraction has been answered adequately in this thread, but to summarize: numerous basic_string methods would allow the client to violate invariants set by the Unicode standard.
The client would not be using the basic_string directly to manipulate the unicode character string, although he would have access to the basic_string. If the client chooses to shoot themselves in the foot, they can. But any operation on the string as a string of characters would be done through another interface.
So what's the advantage of using std::basic_string over, say, std::vector ?
reference counting optimization and maybe others, where there is.
Regards, Stefan _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
-- Felipe Magno de Almeida UIN: 2113442 email: felipe.almeida at ic unicamp br, felipe.m.almeida at gmail com, felipe at synergy com I am a C, modern C++, MFC, ODBC, Windows Services, MAPI developer from synergy, and Computer Science student from State University of Campinas(UNICAMP). To know more about: Unicamp: http://www.ic.unicamp.br Synergy: http://www.synergy.com.br current work: http://www.mintercept.com