Re: [libxml++] Swap std::string for Glib::ustring

[Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com>]

On Sat, 2008-08-02 at 17:39 +0200, Sean Farrell wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> i have been using libxml++ and find it is one of the cleanest
> implementations. There is only one slight drawback, that is the use of
> GLib::ustring. If you are using it out of a Gtk application that is
> not an issue. That was my usage scenario up unit now. The problem is,
> if you are not in a Gtk application linking glibmm plus all it's
> dependencies is really overkill.

It's only likely to be an issue on very restricted embedded systems.
Those systems can fork and patch libxml++ more easily, I guess. glibmm
does not depend on GTK+.

For most real world cases I don't think it's worth the bother.

There is a patch here:
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=320197

It needs to be updated but nobody has bothered to do that yet. Someone
might find it useful if you could do that.

You are welcome to create and maintain a fork of libxml++ that uses this
patch. Just make sure that you change the .so name, the include path,
and the pkg-config name to avoid breaking ABI, breaking existing
applications.

> I see the initial motivation of using Glib::ustring, since the strings
> handled are UTF-8.

Yes, it makes the API clearer and does not encourage you to manipulate
strings incorrectly.

>  But if one looks at the code, Glub::ustring is just
> used as a container for UTF-8 and no real operations are done. As a
> result std::string can also be used for that. It would drop that one
> (mostly useless) dependency and really open libxml++ up for non Gtk /
> Gnome applications.
> 
> I would like you comments on that subject.
> 
> I am willing to do the change, since I am currently thinking of doing
> it locally form me, but that is not the spirit of working together...
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Sean Farrell
> 
> (Yes this is my first post here...)

-- 
Murray Cumming
murrayc murrayc com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com