Lars> | clearString( strng ) where
Lars> |
Lars> | void clearString( string & strng ) {
Lars> | #if defined( ANSI_COMPLIANT_STRING )
Lars> | strng.clear()
Lars> | #else
Lars> | ...
Lars> | #endif
Lars> | }
Lars> |
Lars> | Any comments?
Lars> I will not accept that.
Lars> A change to use string.erase() on the other hand...
Ok. Both gcc's bastring and cxx's string support erase. So, you'd accept a
patch that replaced all instances of string.clear() with string.erse()?
Lars> But remember that this is not the only issue with std::string
Lars> (lyxstring) vs. gcc's bastring or cxx's string.
I don't remember, because I wasn't part of that mammoth discussion about string
vs lyxstring. Care to summarise, or should I trawl the archives?
Angus
