Matthew Wilson wrote:

"Jan Knepper" <jan@smartsoft.us> wrote in message
news:3F39093B.5D8A84CD@smartsoft.us...
> > I first thought it was awful. Those were the days when I thought OO and
> > inheritance were profound things, so ...
>
> Actually... I *still* think OO is great.
I guess I do, in a way. I was probably just being sly for a good quote.
<blush>

<g> Don't worry about it...

> STL only uses half the power of C++. If the original design was done a
little
> better they could have done it in such a way that STL could be used two
fold:
> 1. Derived from an empy base class which would be optimized out with
the
> compiler and STL would be STL as is.
> 2. Derived from a common (replaceable) base class and STL could have
been
> STL, but with OO and all the OO power of C++.
>
. . .
<snip>
Nice.

Thanks!
It is an <brag> original idea </brag>, but I heard later that someone else (might have been Scott Meyers) wrote something alike about it.

Actually, I'll be sending you some docs soon demonstrating a very similar
technique, albeit for a quite different class. Now you've got me thinking
... maybe we'll see some more (borrowed) flesh on the concept in the next
revision, correctly attributed of course. ;)

I just smacked the example out rather quickly. The syntax might have been a bit off.
Because *some* people are so much into templates and STL and forget that the real power of C++ started with OO I got so upset a while ago that I started http://www.vstl.org/ ;-)
I made a start patching a SGI version of STL to actually create VSTL, but I am kinda short in time and money at the moment...

btw, isn't this a potentially rather spiffy thought to carry into the DTL.

Now, that would be a GREAT idea. Let's not make the same mistake twice, but honer design patterns... ;-) Well, that last one because I am upset with the ANSI committee for prototyping swprintf as snwprintf. They didn't want to make the same mistake twice either, but I think declined the fact that there is tons of code out there that works with swprintf WITHOUT the string length parameters. Besides, they had a nice pattern going as:
printf -> wprintf
sprintf -> swprintf
snprintf -> snwprintf
vsprintf -> vswprintf
vsnprintf -> vsnwprintf
Which is now broke... <sigh>

Yours impressedly

Now now... ;-)

Peter the Plagiarist

Who does not?

--
ManiaC++
Jan Knepper