Re: Please help with testing & improving a StringValue class

From:

"Alf P. Steinbach" <alfps@start.no>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.c++

Date:

Sat, 08 Sep 2007 13:50:58 +0200

Message-ID:

<13e53588rdd761b@corp.supernews.com>

* Barry:

Alf P. Steinbach wrote:

char const* const dynValue = "dynamic copy";

std:: cout << (dynamic == dynValue);

prints 0

as it calls
StringValue::operator char const* ()

so == is to compare pointer other than lexicographical compare

I think it would be a good idea to provide
operator== to make lexicographical compare.

Thanks.

This bears thinking about, whether the default semantics should be as
raw pointer (above, plus, may use other pointer operators!) or as
logical string, in which case e.g. concatenation would also be nice.

I'm aware that taking the "as string" semantics to the limit, it becomes
impractical (e.g. locales, infamous Turkish "I"), and that's been used
as an argument for keeping std::string lobotomized. There's a trade-off
here between practicality and surprise surprise for the unwary novice,
and I'm not sure but I think C++ wasn't designed for novices... ;-)

Cheers, & thank you for your constructive feedback,

- Alf