[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: [TSVN] CString vs std::string

From: SteveKing <stefankueng_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2004-12-22 12:52:41 CET

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 11:21:18 +0000, Will Dean <svn@indcomp.co.uk> wrote:
> I would say that the .exe size difference is irrelevant, as it's probably a
> fixed amount which gets added on, not a factor of 2.

True. The filesize won't differ much.

> I think the STL dependancy is also irrelevant, as we're probably going to
> have that in both cases in real life.

Yes, we still need it for other cases where we use STL.

> I conclude that there isn't much to chose between them in terms of
> dependency. AFAIK, ATL was specifically designed for lightweight plug-in
> components (like web-delivered ActiveX controls), so ought to be fairly
> suitable for us here.
> What do you reckon?

I always had the impression that STL is usually faster than MFC/ATL,
especially the string class (and of course map, vector, ...). And if I
recall correctly, you just optimized TortoiseMerge by replacing the
'text file class' there with an STL version.
So what advantages would we have by switching to ATL?


  oo  // \\      "De Chelonian Mobile"
 (_,\/ \_/ \     TortoiseSVN
   \ \_/_\_/>    The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
   /_/   \_\     http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
Received on Wed Dec 22 13:07:11 2004

This is an archived mail posted to the TortoiseSVN Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.