Tomas wrote:
I find your improvements over string class interface very valuable. Is there any hope to incorporate these changes directly into basic_string in the future C++ standard?
Faint, I'd say. If you've been following the reaction, you'll know that this is a tough area to get agreement. I don't know if there's enough support to get it included in Boost and if you can't get the library into Boost it doesn't bode well for the committee.
I mean it's fine we now have super_string class but the fact we have two string classes for the same thing is confusig. And if super_string is superset and better than std::string why not replace it?
Even if you could get agreement that super_string is better than string, someone has to write a paper for the committee suggesting this. Many of the string algorithms that super_string uses have been proposed for TR2, but I'm not sure where they stand. I put super_string out there because it's useful to me and I thought it would be useful to have a discussion about it. I don't have time to write a paper to propose it to the committee, but if someone wanted to do that I'd be fine with it. But beware, there's a good chance it's a waste of time. Jeff