Re: [Boost-users] Report from Mont Tremblant C++ Committee meeting

"Thore Karlsen" wrote in message news:mv2lk1ldeo87dekbjkku3h39f7egqmh347@4ax.com...

On Sun, 9 Oct 2005 21:32:30 -0400, "Beman Dawes" wrote:

[...]

...

String-algo : Interested, but concern over interface and choice of functions, generic vs basic_string.5.3 separate proposal

Any details on this? I love this library, and I would love to see it standardized in some form. Overall I've found the interface and function choices to be excellent (and I'd love to see even more), and I love that it's generic and not limited to basic_string. I use it on vectors and other containers for different kinds of network protocol parsing.

Thorsten Ottosen acted as champion for the paper, but I'll try to recall the discussion. There concern was that at least some of the algorithms were only useful in the context of strings, and so it would be an over-generalization to supply them as free algorithms. One way to counter that argument would be to identify the functions you have found useful on other containers, and to provide some use cases to buttress the argument. --Beman