[sldev] Uses of LLString and std::string ?

Lawson English lenglish5 at cox.net
Wed Jan 23 19:50:06 PST 2008


Tateru Nino wrote:
>
>
> Argent Stonecutter wrote:
>> On 2008-01-23, at 12:08, Richard Nelson wrote:
>>> Before any C++ purists complain, let me note that std::string does 
>>> not have a virtual destructor and hence we can never add any member 
>>> variables or implement a non-trivial destructor in LLString.  It 
>>> serves merely as a convenient wrapper for std::string that tests for 
>>> the null char* case, as Steve mentioned, and provides some handy 
>>> functions (e.g. case-insensitive string comparison) that would 
>>> otherwise require boilerplate code.
>>
>> [speechless]
>>
>> What kind of object oriented language doesn't make this kind of thing 
>> virtually transparent?
> As an aside, some reading up on what the C++ standards committee (I'd 
> recommend Plauger among others) went through from start to finish is 
> enlightening. Yes, C++ is one of the most widely used languages, and 
> with good reason - but it's interesting to see how interest and 
> architecture groups came close to messing it all up too.
>
> This is not to say that SIGs and AWGs are bad. It's more about the 
> process management of them than anything.
>
> Before anyone jumps in, I'll take a moment to reiterate that I'm not 
> saying anything bad about anyone or anything. If you're feeling 
> slighted, you've misread, okay? I'll get you a bunny.
>
As a proud member of AW Groupies, I can't take offense. The AWG doesn't 
do enough [yet] to mess things up in the first place.



Lawson


More information about the SLDev mailing list