From -3236156337196202530 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,e0a6ddd251fe0f72,start X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public From: harald@bion.kth.se (Harald Winroth) Subject: Inconsistent use of default arguments in string class? Date: 1995/11/01 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 118471447 approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au x-original-date: 01 Nov 1995 09:52:05 GMT content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 organization: CVAP/NADA, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden x-auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.std.c++ newsgroups: comp.std.c++ I have a question regarding the proposed string class. In the April WP there are string member functions taking both string and char* arguments. For example, there are class basic_string : ... { ... basic_string& append(const basic_string& str, size_t pos=0, size_t n=NPOS); basic_string& append(const charT* s, size_t n); ... }; As I understand the WP, str.append("abc123", 3) would append "abc" to str, while str.append((string)"abc123", 3) would append "123" to str. Is that interpretation correct? If so, I think this could cause a lot of bugs in application code. Is there a good reason why string member function taking charT* arguments won't also take the same position/size arguments as their basic_string-argument counterparts? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Harald Winroth | Computational Vision and Active Perception Laboratory, harald@bion.kth.se | Royal Institute of Technology, S-10044 Stockholm, Sweden ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu. Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu. The moderation policy is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]