Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov@mmltd.net> wrote in message news:00a101c550d8$39178d50$6401a8c0@pdimov2...
If you think this is a problem, you should discuss it with Thorsten.
I'm not looking forward to that.
Please do anyway. If you think there is a major problem in the defaults of the Range library, please say so.
I think that defining size( T[N] ) as N or N-1, depending on whether T is a character type, will cause problems in generic code and preclude the widespread use of the library. Looking at the actual contents of the array for a NULL terminator can be even worse, as it may easily lead to undefined behavior. In addition, this definition will not adapt well if other character types are added as part of Unicode-ification, in particular, if these character types are typedefs. I, for one, will be avoiding the library because of these issues. "Do the right thing" is a design principle that I usually advocate, but in this specific case I believe that doing the predictable and consistent thing is better.