Subject: Re: [SG16-Unicode] Namespaces
From: Corentin (corentin.jabot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-03-30 17:43:06
On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 22:12 Lyberta <lyberta_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Ranges has made a precedent that we can provide better versions of old
> functions by putting them into a separate namespace. It is general
> consensus that almost all current text related function are obsolete. We
> should consider a namespace for new ones.
> I think std::text fits this. This namespace would contain functions that
> are modern and can properly support Unicode (and other encodings!).
i think we are trying to limit the support for non unicode encodings to
Unicode sandwich and all
> There is also a precedent of my proposal and D1628 having separate
> namespace specifically for Unicode. Generally speaking, Unicode is a
> subset of text processing so in mathematical sense it would be obvious
> to put unicode namespace as std::text::unicode but here I agree that it
> is too much typing.
You will find that LEWG will push strongly against that.
I agree we need _one_ namespace - it's will be a very hard sell.
Nested namespace is very unlikely to reach consensus.
So would be 2 non-nested namespaces
> So I propose the following:
> std::text for general purpose text algorithms (to be determined as we
> haven't even nailed the Unicode yet, but consider std::text::to_upper,
> std::unicode for Unicode classes and algorithms. Everything in std::text
> should be able to work with classes from std::unicode.
> Then we can add more encodings under std or maybe right into std::text
> if they are too simple.
> Theoretical examples:
> SG16 Unicode mailing list
SG16 list run by email@example.com