Re: [TSVN] CString vs std::string

At 11:54 22/12/2004 +0100, you wrote:

>I know that MFC7 and ATL7 have so called common classes, with CStringT
>being one of them. But AFAIK even using CStringT without MFC (only
>ATL) means having to link (statically or dynamically) with another
>dll.

I'm not 100% certain about that as far as ATL is concerned, but I'll check.

But of course, using the STL means we have to link against the STL DLL, so
we might do better to avoid *that*!

>We could gain much more if we would drop Win98 support ;) That way we
>could reduce the UTF8 functions and many many #ifndef UNICODE
>statements.

Yes, or we could go to the new(-ish) unicode translation layer for Win98,
but I think that's probably a bit much.

>If there's no good reason to using ATL/MFC in the shell extension, I'd
>like to keep it out of there.

We'll have to define "good"! I think getting rid of the #ifdef _MFC_VER
stuff would be good, but I'm not sure that it's enough.

I'll look into what the ATL CString overhead is.

Cheers,

Will

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
Received on Wed Dec 22 13:35:20 2004