On ד', 2013-04-03 at 12:30 -0400, Paul Davis wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 12:23 PM, אנטולי קרסנר <tombackton@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > > Why? Isn't it natural to wish to have a map containing > user-defined > strings, which may be in any language? > > that describes std::string too. > > all that Glib::ustring gives you are UTF-8-aware iterators. > > if you never iterate over a string that may be UTF-8 in order to get > individual characters rather than individual bytes, you don't need > ustring and it will complicate your life. > > i made this mistake with ustring too, and used it widely. my code now > only contains two references to a ustring in about 300,000 lines of > code, and they are both places where i have to iterate through a > string character by character. everywhere else uses std:;string. the > program is fully translatable and has been translated into several > languages. > I see, thanks for the advice. I get the ustring objects from a library I use, so I can't avoid them. The question is how I produce the hash. There's also an option to store std::string, but again - I can get the std::string from raw() or from collate_key(). I found some source code on GitHub which uses Glib::ustring with an unordered map, and simply passes the std::string hash, which works because Glib::ustring has a non-explicit type cast method, operator std::string, which returns exactly what raw() returns. I don't know it if works, and it may not be critical in my case because I use just a few strings in most cases, but I'm still wondering. (note: I had a thought, maybe storing std::string is faster because the hash only needs to operate on std::string directly, but that doesn't change the question or using collate_key() versus using raw() ) _______________________________________________ gtk-list mailing list gtk-list@xxxxxxxxx https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list
