istrstream class to be replaced

[Ahmed Ossman]

Hi All,

I have this piece of code:

char str[500];
......
double x;
istrstream in(str);

in >> x;
.....
}

I want to replace istrstream class with another class that do the same job
as I compile with new Solaris Compiler which doesn't has this class??
Could I??

B.R.
Ahmed Ossman

[Rolf Magnus]

Re: istrstream class to be replaced

Ahmed Ossman wrote:
[color=blue]
> Hi All,
>
> I have this piece of code:
>
> char str[500];
> .....
> double x;
> istrstream in(str);
>
> in >> x;
> ....
> }
>
> I want to replace istrstream class with another class that do the same
> job as I compile with new Solaris Compiler which doesn't has this
> class?? Could I??[/color]

#include <sstream>

double x;
std::istringstr eam in;

in >> x;

}

[tom_usenet]

Re: istrstream class to be replaced

On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 11:44:11 +0200, "Ahmed Ossman"
<ahmed_ossman@m entor.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>Hi All,
>
>I have this piece of code:
>
>char str[500];
>.....
>double x;
>istrstream in(str);
>
>in >> x;
>....
>}
>
>I want to replace istrstream class with another class that do the same job
>as I compile with new Solaris Compiler which doesn't has this class??[/color]

Is it a C++ compiler? If so, it should have that class (otherwise it
isn't a conforming compiler). This should work:

#include <strstream>

int main()
{
char const* str = "1.57";
std::istrstream in(str);

double x;
in >> x;
}

Does it?
According to

http://wwws.sun.com/software/sundev/suncc/faqs/cpp.html#3q0

it probably should. How about with -library=stlport 4?

Tom

[Unforgiven]

Re: istrstream class to be replaced

tom_usenet wrote:[color=blue]
> Is it a C++ compiler? If so, it should have that class (otherwise it
> isn't a conforming compiler). This should work:[/color]

You're wrong. <strstream> is deprecated in most compilers, and it's fully
standards-compliant equivalent is <sstream>. The difference is that the
strstream classes from <strstream> were built on a char* (C-style string),
and the stringstream classes from <sstream> are built on std::string. Their
public interface is practically the same though.

--
Unforgiven

"You can't rightfully be a scientist if you mind people thinking
you're a fool."

[Ron Natalie]

Re: istrstream class to be replaced


"Unforgiven " <jaapd3000@hotm ail.com> wrote in message news:bodv7l$1d5 9l1$1@ID-136341.news.uni-berlin.de...[color=blue]
> tom_usenet wrote:[color=green]
> > Is it a C++ compiler? If so, it should have that class (otherwise it
> > isn't a conforming compiler). This should work:[/color]
>
> You're wrong. <strstream> is deprecated in most compilers,[/color]

No he's right. strwstream is deprecated in the standard, but that doesn't
mean anything. Compliers are required to implement all the language
features expressed in the standards, even the ones marked deprecated.
[color=blue]
> and it's fully standards-compliant equivalent is <sstream>.[/color]

strstream is FULLY standards compliant.
[color=blue]
> Their public interface is practically the same though.[/color]

Their public interface isn't the same at all with the exception of their
common inheritance of the iostream classes.

[tom_usenet]

Re: istrstream class to be replaced

On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 18:08:58 +0100, "Unforgiven "
<jaapd3000@hotm ail.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>tom_usenet wrote:[color=green]
>> Is it a C++ compiler? If so, it should have that class (otherwise it
>> isn't a conforming compiler). This should work:[/color]
>
>You're wrong. <strstream> is deprecated in most compilers, and it's fully
>standards-compliant equivalent is <sstream>.[/color]

I don't understand what you mean by "<strstream > is deprecated in most
compilers", since compilers aren't responsible for deprecation, the
standard is.

<strstream> is part of the C++ standard, deprecated or not. If a
compiler doesn't have it, it isn't standards compliant. Deprecated
means:
"Normative for the current edition of the standard, but not guaranteed
to be part of the Standard for future revisions."

The difference is that the[color=blue]
>strstream classes from <strstream> were built on a char* (C-style string),
>and the stringstream classes from <sstream> are built on std::string. Their
>public interface is practically the same though.[/color]

The whole freeze thing being the main difference. strstream can be a
lot more efficient than stringstream under some circumstances though -
I've used it in the past for that reason when interfacing with C char*
based APIs like POSIX mqueues, etc.

Tom

[Unforgiven]

Re: istrstream class to be replaced

Ron Natalie wrote:[color=blue]
> "Unforgiven " <jaapd3000@hotm ail.com> wrote in message
> news:bodv7l$1d5 9l1$1@ID-136341.news.uni-berlin.de...[color=green]
>> tom_usenet wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> Is it a C++ compiler? If so, it should have that class (otherwise it
>>> isn't a conforming compiler). This should work:[/color]
>>
>> You're wrong. <strstream> is deprecated in most compilers,[/color]
>
> No he's right. strwstream is deprecated in the standard, but that
> doesn't
> mean anything.[/color]

You're both right of course, I should really do my homework before
posting... :(

My apologies.

--
Unforgiven

"You can't rightfully be a scientist if you mind people thinking
you're a fool."