Hi Noel,
On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 14:17 +0200, Noel Grandin wrote:
It just seems to me that we could easily enough steal a bit from the
length field to indicate that the buffer is immutable, and then we could
reduce our complexity by eliminating OUStringBuffer.
We already steal bits from the ref-count for magic like this: static
strings, and interned strings ;-)
The question is - would it be more obvious if:
void method(rtl::OUString &rFoo, rtl::OUString &rBaa)
{
rFoo += "foo"; // no exception it's mutable.
rBaa += "baa"; // exception because it's immutable.
}
:-) i assume not. OTOH - I too am not a huge fan of the sal string
classes for general usability - but I've not done a ton of work with
them recently to be fair.
ATB,
Michael.
--
michael.meeks@suse.com <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.