• From: Steinar Bang <sb@m...>
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: 03 Dec 1999 14:14:54 +0100

>>>>> James Clark <jjc@j...>:

> - Would it be better to typedef SAXString to the Standard C++ string
> class (ie std::basic_string<SAXChar>)?

An argument for using 
        typdef const SAXChar* SAXString;
is that you get late construction of the basic_string<>, ie. you don't 
create it until you have to (eg. when using it to do a lookup in an
STL map<>).

But ven if it's not used directly on the SAX interface, such a typedef
would be useful when handling the data (eg. for creating the above
mentioned map<>).

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: SAX/C++: First interface draft
    • From: Steinar Bang <sb@m...>

• References:
  • SAX/C++: First interface draft
    • From: David Megginson <david@m...>
  • Re: SAX/C++: First interface draft
    • From: James Clark <jjc@j...>

• Prev by Date: Re: SAX/C++: UTF-8 v UTF-16
• Next by Date: Re: Content or Metadata?
• Previous by thread: Re: SAX/C++: First interface draft
• Next by thread: Re: SAX/C++: First interface draft
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread