That is exactly what the doctor ordered.
I spent a lot of time searching via google and the best that I came up
with was what I shared for discussion.
Thanks for the ISOCPP.org reference, I am sure more of us will be
looking at it as well.
Have a great day,
md
On 8/24/2015 9:32 AM, Thiago Mac
On Monday 24 August 2015 06:16:55 m...@rpzdesign.com wrote:
> Would you be interested in sharing your solution
> to the switch(STRING) problem?
It's been posted several times to the C++ discussion lists:
string_switch(string,
do_case(value1, [] { do1(); }),
Andre & Helmut:
Thank you for your comments.
Would you be interested in sharing your solution
to the switch(STRING) problem?
md
On 8/24/2015 6:11 AM, André Somers wrote:
> Op 24-8-2015 om 14:07 schreef m...@rpzdesign.com:
>> Helmut:
>>
>> Yes, but you are talking about a different use case
>>
Op 24-8-2015 om 14:07 schreef m...@rpzdesign.com:
> Helmut:
>
> Yes, but you are talking about a different use case
> with algorithmic purity.
>
> We do not care about every string.
>
> We only care about the strings in our program.
>
> For quality assurance, you can scan the source code looking fo
Helmut:
Yes, but you are talking about a different use case
with algorithmic purity.
We do not care about every string.
We only care about the strings in our program.
For quality assurance, you can scan the source code looking for every
instance of the fnhash("STRING") and make sure there are
This will not work in every case because you cannot guarantee that your
hash function generates a unique value for every string. In hash based
containers you still have to compare against the valueof the string.
Am 24.08.2015 01:27 schrieb "mark diener" :
> Hello List:
>
> Have you ever wanted an
Hello List:
Have you ever wanted an efficient switch statement on QString values?
There are many references to the subject with various algorithms, but they
all have some major flaw in the implementation.
For those looking for a way to have compile and run time hash on their
strings, I spent a l
