Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
"Eric Niebler" <eric@boost-consulting.com> wrote in message news:4288F568.9030205@boost-consulting.com... | | Pavol Droba wrote: | > On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 08:17:15PM -0400, David Abrahams wrote: | > | >>"Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto@cs.auc.dk> writes: | >> | >> | >>>| I'd like to leave it for the discussion. Right now it seems, that | >>>| most of the people that entered discussion prefer c-array view. | >>>| I would prefer c-string view, but I'm probably biased by the fact | >>>| that I'm the author of StringAlgo library. | >>> | >>> I prefer the string view too. | >> | >>I just have one thing to say: vector<bool>. | >> | > | > | > Pardon me, but somehow I cannot figure out the point here. Can you please | > explain the me the connection to vector<bool> | > | | | vector<bool> creates all kinds of problems because generic code can't | make assumptions about the behavior of vector<T>. vector<bool> is widely | regarded as a Bad Move. Dave is saying that treating char[] different | than, say, int[] is inviting the same sorts of problems. It will make it | difficult to deal with T[] in generic code. | | I agree with Dave.
are these "problems" as serious as vector<bool> ?
Yes. It's exactly the same situation. You are giving collection<X> different semantics than collection<Y>. BTW, I find your use of quotes rather "disparaging". If you think this situation is different, please give /technical/ reasons. Thanks. -- Eric Niebler Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com