From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-11 10:38:24
Pavol Droba <droba_at_[hidden]> writes:
> On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 08:59:59AM -0400, David Abrahams wrote:
>> Pavol Droba <droba_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>
>> >
>> > However I can see a way how to resolve a problem with future unicode
>> > character classes. Simple trait class can do the job nicely.
>>
>> The way to handle this is with a simple range wrapper:
>>
>> string_literal("Hello, world")
>
> This is what I have actualy suggested in later posts.
I'm confused, then. When I read
> We can make Range library to work as you request, but it would
> make it fully unusable on string literals.
I get the impression you think the range library should work on string
literals directly. I am with Peter in the opinion that string
literals can only properly be treated by a range library as an array
of characters, including the null terminator.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com