From: Erik Wien (wien_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-16 01:53:49
Just wanted to add some things I forgot in the other mail.
I'd like to stress that none of the code you see in the current
implementation should be concidered production quality. There are a lot
of things that are less than optimal, and a lot of things that are just
plain wrong, and might very well blow up. :) Much of it is simply thrown
together to test different ideas.
One of the things I'm really not sure about, is the character_set_traits
concept that is in there now. The basic idea was to allow the library to
be used with character sets that are not code point compatible with
Unicode by abstracting this into another traits concept, and having the
string class use that for it's external interface. This was an idea that
seemed good at the time, but I'm getting more and more unsure about the
usefulness of it. The biggest reservation I have against it, is that it
basically makes it impossible to incorporate Unicode specific
functionality in the string class' interface. (Functions for
normalization and collation come to mind.)
Another thing is the way the Unicode Character Database is implemented.
As of now, we simply generate one massive 2MB source file with the
database as one gigantic array inside it. This of course leads to
equally gigantic executables, which may or may not be desirable.
Anyway.. Just wanted to cover my behind before you start complaining. ;)
- Erik