[PATCH] sal_bool and String conversions

[Noel Grandin]

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