Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 10:41:36AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> the issue is:
>
| This was not clear from the context.
>
>> ostringstream ost;
>> lyxstring lstr = ost.str();
>> ^^^^^ ^^^^
>> lyxstring basic_string
>>
>> So to make this compile you either:
>> - use c_str()
>> - or anoother markup (STRCONV f.ex to make it ugly and tell
>> _why_ it is there.
>> - use implicit conversions. but I do not like that because then
>> it is never shown why the conversion is there and that it is ugly
>
| The first one punishes --without-included-string without need.
>
| I'd probably uses the last one unless STRCONV is only needed in a few
| places (i.e. < 100 times in *.C). Having it everywhere does not help
| maintenance as it distracts when searching for real problems. I don't think
| the std::string vs lyxstring issue is important enough to be allowed to
| scream at me every second line...
If you looked at my patch you would see that STRCONV is in fact not
used a lot. Of course it is in every place where a c_str was used for
conversion between string and lyxstring...
I'll just apply my STRCONV patch... (this evening...)
--
Lgb
