Re: [review][fixed_string] FixedString review starts Nov 25

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [review][fixed_string] FixedString review starts Nov 25

Boost - Dev mailing list
Joaquin M López Muñoz wrote:

> GitHub repository: https://github.com/18/fixed_string
> Online docs: https://18.github.io/doc/fixed_string

Could a single header version be temporarily provided for the review, so
that we can play with it on Godbolt? The current header arrangement makes
that impossible. (Actually, a single header for this specific library
doesn't seem a bad idea in principle - the separation appears to provide no
value in this case.)

Also, a synopsis section in the documentation might have been nice, to allow
one to see all the declarations in one place. (Admittedly, the main header
does serve that purpose somewhat.)

What is the C++ standard requirement of this library?


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [review][fixed_string] FixedString review starts Nov 25

Boost - Dev mailing list
> Also, a synopsis section in the documentation might have been nice, to
> allow one to see all the declarations in one place. (Admittedly, the main
> header does serve that purpose somewhat.)

I join the others in noting the pervasive lack of constexpr and noexcept.
Even the default constructor isn't either. Can't think of a reason why it
would throw. (The lack of constexpr is much easier to explain.)

Also, Traits template parameters were wrong in C++98, and they remain wrong
today, even though the committee has propagated that mistake into
string_view.


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [review][fixed_string] FixedString review starts Nov 25

Boost - Dev mailing list
On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 10:50 AM Peter Dimov via Boost <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> > Also, a synopsis section in the documentation might have been nice, to
> > allow one to see all the declarations in one place. (Admittedly, the
> main
> > header does serve that purpose somewhat.)
>
> I join the others in noting the pervasive lack of constexpr and noexcept.
> Even the default constructor isn't either. Can't think of a reason why it
> would throw. (The lack of constexpr is much easier to explain.)
>
> Also, Traits template parameters were wrong in C++98, and they remain
> wrong
> today, even though the committee has propagated that mistake into
> string_view.
>

+all the number.

Zach

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost