> On 13 Jul 2019, at 13:41, Thiago Macieira <thiago.macie...@intel.com> wrote: > On Friday, 12 July 2019 17:37:59 -03 Matthew Woehlke wrote: >> That said, I took a look at startsWith, and... surprise! It is *already >> a template*. So at least in that case, it isn't obvious why adding more >> combinations would be so terribly onerous. > > Again, note how the template implicitly assumes things. A 3-character string > cannot be present at the beginning (startsWith), end (endsWith) or anywhere > in > the middle (contains, indexOf, lastIndexOf) of a 2-character one, for example. > > But a 2- and 3-byte UTF-8 string can be the prefix of a 1-character UTF-16 > string and a 4-byte UTF-8 string can be the prefix of a 2-codeunit UTF-16 (1 > character). That means implementing UTF-8 functions requires different > algorithms in the first place. That means templates are not usually the > answer. > > I'm not saying impossible. You can, by writing sufficiently generic > algorithms > that scan the strings in lockstep (you can scan UTF-8 backwards, after all). > But the reason you don't *want* to is that our Latin1 and UTF-16 algorithms > are optimised, often vectorised, for their purpose. We don't want to lose the > efficiency we've already got. > > And I'm not saying we shouldn't have UTF-8 algorithms or even a > QUtf8StringView or some such. It would have helped in CBOR, for example, see > QCborStreamWriter: > void appendTextString(const char *utf8, qsizetype len); > > This is one that should at least get the overload. > > -- > Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com > Software Architect - Intel System Software Products
As I understood the template suggestion, it’s more about not having to add 64 different overloads (or several more string classes) to the Qt API, and less about unifying all implementations into a single set of algorithms. With an (ideally) single template-based API we don’t have peopleusing Qt get lost in the jungle for overloads and string classes. For the implementation, we can specialise the templates to call the suitable internal functions that implement the various algorithms. I don’t know or claim that this is feasible, but that’s how I have interpeted the suggestion for a template-based solution, and generally the (valid, IMHO) complaint that we have by now a ton of classes in Qt that solve almost the same problem, and require a significant cognitive effort to chose correctly from. Cheers, Volker _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
