Re: [libxml++] UTF8 support

[Ole Laursen <olau hardworking dk>]

Hi,

Being an independent developer, if I may be allowed to voice my
opinion, I would like to do that. :-)

I think the added complexity is a concern. Dealing with heavily
templatized classes is a pain, and can really kill code readability.
Of course, if it can all be hidden behind typedefs, it doesn't need to
be a problem.

Murray Cumming <murrayc usa net> writes:

[...]

> 2. I'm not sure that it's worth giving up the benefits of libxml++ being a
> shared library just so that people don't have to write utility functions to
> convert from Glib::ustring to their own string classes. In particular I'm
> scared of asking people to recompile their apps just to get minor libxml++
> implementation fixes.

But I don't think this is much of a problem, really. libxml++ is quite
small. And there aren't any dinosaurs relying on it.


But I really don't see the big problem here. std::string is really
just a fancy way of saying 'char *', right? And any decent
Unicode-aware string library will have a convenient conversion from
std::string, right?

So if you need to process the individual characters (in my experience
with gtkmm/glibmm, this is seldomly needed) you can simply treat the
input/output from the library as raw data which you feed to your
string library. Why is this a problem?

-- 
Ole Laursen
http://www.cs.auc.dk/~olau/