Rainman Lee wrote: > Hi Andrew > I know that implicit conversions usually bring more side effects than > convenience. But it is not the reason that we should give all them up > I think ;) > There is no implicit conversion from std::string to const char*, > because if a string is destroyed, the pointer to its content will be > invalid.
No, there indeed is no implicit conversion primarily for the reason mentioned by Andrew (at least the "inventor" of this class told me so many years ago): developers should not inadvertedly pass non-ascii character strings to a UniCode string ctor. Creating a UniCode string from a character string always needs an accompanying string encoding as parameter. > Fortunately, we don't have to consider during reference conversions. > The only thing I am not very sure is whether there are some > ambiguities that may be introduced by this implicit reference > conversion. Currently I also fail to see a potential problem for the case you described. But of course absence of evidence is no evidence of absence. :-) Regards, Mathias -- Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: 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, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
