Re: ustring vs std::string

[Paul Davis <pjdavis engineering uiowa edu>]

John Taber wrote:

> >> What are your thoughts about this?
> > Has anyone seen a definative write up on this anywhere?
>
> No, I haven't seen any good writeups, and yes, this is a real pain - 
> it seems the C++ standards committee has really dropped the ball in 
> modernizing C++ std::string to accomodate the language issue, which 
> has led to other packages doing things like glib::ustring and Qt 
> Qstring, all which leads to more non standard coding.  Of course there 
> are always reasons or justifications, but in my opinion, the failure 
> of C++ to keep modernizing will just continue to lead programmers to 
> go to other languages (ie C#, ruby, Ajax/php ....).  Even the new 
> proposed additions to c++ seem so little, so late.
>
> Meanwhile, in our c++ code, we use std::string throughout, accept the 
> limitations it may cause, and in our gtkmm gui code are constantly 
> converting from std::string using raw, etc.  If you are purely locked 
> into gtkmm, then it probably makes sense to forget std::string and 
> just go glib::ustring.   If you need to change your gui later, you can 
> always do search and replace, though a pain.  Looking ahead, we're 
> just planning to move away from c++ to a more modern, productive 
> environment.

I resent that about switching to an evil language.  Although I 
understand the shortcommings of std::string, I'm an American and firmly 
believe we should impose our language on every other country. ( EXTREME 
SARCASM )

Personally, for my project I stick with std::string and constantly 
complain about converting back and forth like John was saying.  Granted 
I'll probably never leave C++ for any bastard languages like C# or those 
horrible inefficient scripting languages. - For reference I have to work 
on projects that are responsible for things like three dimensional 
segmentation and volumetric deconvolution.  And anyone that tries to 
tell me something like java can be compiled into native code can save 
themselves the email cause it just aint true that its as fast as  C++.  
Not to mention the C++ language allows for so much more flexibility ( 
thats strictly personal but I do believe it thouroughly. )

Anyway, I've been on too long with out sleep so that probably didn't do 
anything but muddy the waters of comprehension.

Cheers,
Paul

> _______________________________________________
> gtkmm-list mailing list
> gtkmm-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list