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.