Re: Glib::ustring tradeoffs?

[Matthias Kaeppler <matthias finitestate org>]

Foster, Gareth wrote:
> My thoughts are that the whole business of strings in C++ is anoying, it's a
> real shame this can't all be resolved within the standard. I am sure there
> are good reasons why things are as they are, but I don't claim to understand
> them. I'm still not even sure about std::wstring vs glib:ustring for
> example.

You can say that again. What's also annoying is that everything is mixed 
up. For example, almost everything in gtkmm uses Glib::ustring, but most 
of the functions for which I wanted to abandon boost::filesystem (e.g. 
glib::path_get_basename) return std::stringS. Maybe there is a reason 
for it, I don't know.

So even if I'd change everything to Glib::ustring, I'd still had to mess 
with 1-byte strings now and then and this may be critical for my program 
because it's a filemanager and broken path names will obviously break 
the program.

- Matthias