From: Ben Hutchings (ben.hutchings_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-20 09:47:48
David B. Held <dheld_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Maxim Yegorushkin wrote:
>
> > I've been working on a small library - an immutable C++ string. Now
> > it is in usable state and has been put in use in a couple of real
> > projects. Although it needs further polishing, I would like to know
> > is there any interest in such a library?
> >
> > Here is the link: http://conststring.sourceforge.net/
>
> First, I'll say that yes, I am very interested in a library such as
> this. Second, let me say that "const_string<>" and "immutable string"
> don't seem like the right terms to me. The fact that you can call
> operator?=() and append() on it tell me that there is little that is
> "const" or "immutable" about it. It seems to me that "cow_string<>"
> would be more appropriate, but perhaps others have different opinions.
I once wrote a string template class similar to this, though without the
clever storage policy. Unfortunately this was done in the course of my
employment and I left that job without having got permission to make it
public. Anyway, I think the name I settled on was atomic_string.
> I suppose its not completely a COW string, since you don't support the
> full set of mutating operations.
<snip>
It never modifies buffers once they've been initialised, so it has no
use for COW.
Ben.