[openbeos] Re: BString

  • From: Travis Smith <sage@xxxxxxxx>
  • To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: 10 Nov 2001 22:32:54 -0500

On Sat, 2001-11-10 at 12:59, Daniel Reinhold wrote:
> >
> >Just quickie, I am writing a version of BString, just to cut my teeth, 
> >any objections/suggestions?
> >        Keith
> There are gobs of implementations of a basic string class out there -- 
> I think most C++ programming books probably do some sort of version as 
> an example. Also, the MUSCLE distrib comes with a number of basic class 
> implementations including a string class. You may want to look at those 
> for inspiration (you can get MUSCLE at BeBits).
> However you go about it, I would make sure that your version is as 
> lightweight as is possible. It should have the minimum overhead above 
> and beyond C char pointers. Developers quickly learn whenever a class 
> is too heavy or inefficient and just avoid using it.
A class too heavy for usage describes the entire STL. I use the STL
because it is 'standard' only when I have to. I have a library of my own
classes that I use for speed. 
> Finally, when you have your battle tested version ready, rename it to 
> BString and check it into the CVS. And then let us know so we can 
> properly praise you!
I properly agree with this. The idea is to make it better the current
BString. Easy and simple to use along with the speed factor.

This is all from someone who just returned a couple of hours ago from a
programming contest and is brain fried from using things like the STL.
You don't have time to build your own stack/string/etc...

Do we plan to implemnt a BStack, BQueue, B<whatever>? I think planning
these things to take the place of bloated STL for quicker would be wise.

I have to sleep now. 


~Travis Smith
Programmer / Administrator
sage at ieee dot org

-- Attached file included as plaintext by Listar --

Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org


Other related posts: