On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 3:41 PM, Phil Endecott <spam_from_boost_dev@chezphil.org> wrote:
Marshall Clow wrote:
I'm about to check in some new functionality into the string_algo library; an implementation of string_ref.
A string_ref is a non-owning reference to a string. It is implemented as a {pointer, length} pair, and is exceedingly useful when parsing, and manipulating strings in "read-only" ways.
I did something like this once. I called mine const_string_facade - I also had a mutable version - and it was a template that took an iterator pair. This lets you adapt something like a vector<char> into a string.
basic_string_ref doesn't template its member functions with container or iterator parameter types, so it can't do something like adapting a vector<char> or list<char> into a string. A range-like type (basic_string_range?) would be better for that, handles iterator types generically, and also would be able to handle NTCTS more efficiently. OTOH, operations that require random access iterators can use basic_string_ref directly, but can't use a basic_string_range type, which typically only requires input iterators.
BUT, I think my feeling is that this is actually taking us in the wrong direction: my current coding style tries to avoid the "special" features of std::string and prefers the things that are common to other containers, and std::algorithms.
Yeah, I have some similar misgivings. I'd be happier if basic_string_ref and basic_string_range were part of the same proposal so users got in the habit of choosing the approach that is best for their need. --Beman