Re: refactoring OUString

On 06.06.2011 18:57, tora - Takamichi Akiyama wrote:
> On 2011/06/07 0:27, Michael Stahl wrote:
>  > refactoring OUString has to be done carefully because it is a central
> part
>  > of the URE API/ABI and those must be compatible.
>  >
>  > a number of people here have come to the conclusion that it would be an
>  > improvement to use ::rtl::OString with UTF8 encoding as the standard
>  > string type, but unfortunately this would be an enormous effort to
> change,
>  > and it would mean breaking the backward compatibility of the C++ UNO
>  > binding, so it was never likely to actually happen.
>  >
>  > so far we haven't even got rid of the tools strings... sigh.
>
> I see.
>
> This is just an idea. How about adding a new class besides OUString?
We already have enough string classes. :-)

Besides that, you are right, rtl::OUString is stupid. We planned to 
discuss its replacement in the context of a future OOo 4.0 release, 
allowing for some incompatibility here. If done properly, the changes 
would require only recompilation of in-process C++ code.

But as you know, we are faced with a completely new situation for the 
OOo future. So we should postpone discussing this topic until the dust 
has settled.

Regards,
Mathias

-- 
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Oracle: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
Please don't reply to "[email protected]".
I use it for the OOo lists and only rarely read other mails sent to it.
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to [email protected]
For additional commands send email to [email protected]
with Subject: help