On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 7:47 AM Andrey Semashev wrote:
On 10/18/21 4:22 AM, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote: Writing more string_view types is not the answer for the reasons I wrote earlier. At some point you will have a problem of interoperability between those types, only more of them.
(Or tell your users to switch to C++23 I suppose.)
I'm not sure what C++23 has to do with this.
C++23 could get http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2021/p1989r2.pdf which means that std::string_view can be implicitly constructed from another range (e.g. boost::string_view) without boost::string_view needing a conversion operator. Similarly if boost::string_view adds that range constructor, it could be implicitly constructed from a range like std::string_view. Glen