[libxml++] templates v. library
- From: Murray Cumming <murrayc usa net>
- To: <libxmlplusplus-general lists sourceforge net>
- Subject: [libxml++] templates v. library
- Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 13:22:08 -0000
I was wondering, if we decide that it makes sense for libxml++ to become a set
of templates in headers instead of a library, in order to allow a choice of
string classes, why doesn't the same argument apply to all other libraries,
such as gtkmm? Is it just that libxml++ is smaller? If so, does anyone
advocate that all small C++ libraries should actually be templates, given that
almost all C++ libraries will tend to need a utf8 string class? I don't mean
to sound rude - I'm just trying to be logical.
Murray Cumming
murrayc usa net
www.murrayc.com
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]