rlseal wrote:
>> I guess it can be trivially added by overloading like
>> foo::label(const std::string &txt) { copy_label(txt.c_str(); }
>> etc.
> I agree. Label(const std::string& str) should copy by default and the
Yes
> user should have LabelRef(std::string& str) to reference the label if
> they want that behavior.
Hmm I don't get that part, what would it be designed to do?
> Making use of both STL and Boost will NOT necessarily bloat the code (if
> used properly), but will definitely make the code less buggy and more
> readable. There are several places in the 1.1.x series that could
> benefit tremendously just from boost::shared_ptr and
> std::vector<whatever>. Boost and STL are not going away, and should be
> (I could be wrong here as I am not a big windows fan) platform
> independent.
I like boost, and std - but I would "vote" against using boost with small
exceptions.
From boost, I would only take small, self-contained libs like shared/weak
ptr, and boost::any.
Why? Because, despite boost being really cool and helpfull, I do NOT
consider it yet to be fully mature and portable.
This is because boost proven to be problematic with crossbuilding.
With FLTK I could trivially develop GUI application on linux for win32 and
linux (and mac) - I love that.
But boost is hard to crossbuild (unless something changed recently, I will
ask boost devels), and takes like hour to build, are rtesulting files are
huge (over 300 mb afair, including debug libs).
IMHO - better to use header only small libs from boost.
But mostly - lets use std.
--
Rafał Maj
Software developer
http://www.limcore.com/
_______________________________________________
fltk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
