1 Jun
2005
1 Jun
'05
10:33 p.m.
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Peter Dimov wrote:
[... regarding (busted) 21.3/5 ...]
My point was that a COW-friendly class should have had
class cow_friendly_string { public:
char get( int i ) const; void set( int i, char ch ); };
sidestepping the above problem.
I take it that you'd like to sorta castrate "cow_unfriendly_string" (the standard one) to make it more user (read: looser) friendly. ;-)
No, I was just saying that some interfaces are more COW-friendly than others, that's all. Designing a good std::string is hard and not on my list of issues at the moment. ;-)