On 2012-10-02 16:00, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
am unsure about this:
+ OUStringBuffer & operator+=( const OUString &str )
+ {
+ return append( str.getStr(), str.getLength() );
+ }
+
+ /**
+ Appends the string representation of the <code>char</code>
array
+ argument to this string buffer.
+
+ The characters of the array argument are appended, in
order, to
+ the contents of this string buffer. The length of this string
+ buffer increases by the length of the argument.
+
+ @param str the characters to be appended.
+ @return this string buffer.
+ @since LibreOffice 3.7
+ */
+ OUStringBuffer & operator+=( const sal_Unicode * str )
+ {
+ return append( str, rtl_ustr_getLength( str ) );
+ }
/**
+ Appends the string representation of the ASCII
<code>char</code>
+ argument to this string buffer.
+
+ The argument is appended to the contents of this string
buffer.
+ The length of this string buffer increases by <code>1</code>.
+
+ @param c an ASCII <code>char</code>.
+ @return this string buffer.
+
+ @since LibreOffice 3.7
+ */
+ OUStringBuffer & operator+=(char c)
+ {
+ return append(c);
+ }
hmmm... do we really want to have 2 sets of methods append() and
operator+= that do the same thing, possibly with different overloads?
perhaps we should deprecate the append methods... but those often have
addition radix etc, parameters... and is it possible to chain += like
append() in a single statement?
I would just stick to append-only for OUStringBuffer.
(Also, in general, it makes sense to keep changes to oustring/oustrbuf
in sync with changes to ostring/ostrbuf.)
Part of my motivation for adding this, besides making String->OUString
conversion easier, was that OUString already has the operator+= methods.
Disclaimer: http://www.peralex.com/disclaimer.html
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
