+2002-10-12 Jonathan Wakely <jw@kayari.org>
+ Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net>
+
+ * docs/html/21_strings/howto.html#5: Correct nasting of XHTML
+ elements. Correct allocator-related text.
+
2002-10-11 Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz@redhat.com>
* testsuite/22_locale/static_members.cc (test02): Fix.
<p>That's the theory. Remember however that basic_string has additional
type parameters, which take default arguments based on the character
type (called CharT here):
- <pre>
+ </p>
+ <pre>
template <typename CharT,
typename Traits = char_traits<CharT>,
typename Alloc = allocator<CharT> >
class basic_string { .... };</pre>
- Now, <code>allocator<CharT></code> will probably Do The Right
- Thing by default, unless you need to do something very strange with
- memory allocation in your characters.
+ <p>Now, <code>allocator<CharT></code> will probably Do The Right
+ Thing by default, unless you need to implement your own allocator
+ for your characters.
</p>
<p>But <code>char_traits</code> takes more work. The char_traits
template is <em>declared</em> but not <em>defined</em>.
That means there is only
- <pre>
+ </p>
+ <pre>
template <typename CharT>
struct char_traits
{
static void foo (type1 x, type2 y);
...
};</pre>
- and functions such as char_traits<CharT>::foo() are not
+ <p>and functions such as char_traits<CharT>::foo() are not
actually defined anywhere for the general case. The C++ standard
permits this, because writing such a definition to fit all possible
CharT's cannot be done. (For a time, in earlier versions of GCC,