I'm wondering if the following ustring function:
/// Cast to int, which is interpreted as testing whether it's not an
/// empty string. This allows you to write "if (t)" with the same
/// semantics as if it were a char*.
operator int (void) const { return !empty(); }
is a good idea? Reason being that this allows for what is probably
unexpected behavior in the common use case of trying to assign a ustring to
a std::string (note how this case could also happen from a simple typo if
the "u" in ustring was accidentally omitted). For instance:
ustring my_ustring("string A");
string my_string("string B");
my_string = my_ustring;
printf(" my_string=\"%s\" and\n my_ustring=\"%s\"\n", my_string.c_str(),
my_ustring.c_str());
will print out:
my_string="" and
my_ustring="string A"
which is most likely not the intended result. If we get rid of this
function, then the compiler will point out our mistake:
foo.cpp:13:14: error: no viable overloaded '='
my_string = my_ustring;
I realize getting rid of this function would break lots of preexisting
code, but I think this might be worth it in order to prevent this type of
problem. If it's too big of a change, then at least it might be worth
adding a comment to this function indicating that it will cause this
problem.
_______________________________________________
Oiio-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org
