From: herbs@cntc.com (Herb Sutter)
Subject: Guru of the Week #29: Solution
Date: 22 Jan 1998 00:00:00 GMT
Message-ID: <6a8q26$9qa@netlab.cs.rpi.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++.moderated


 .--------------------------------------------------------------------.
 |  Guru of the Week problems and solutions are posted regularly on   |
 |   news:comp.lang.c++.moderated. For past problems and solutions    |
 |            see the GotW archive at http://www.cntc.com.            |
 | Is there a topic you'd like to see covered? mailto:herbs@cntc.com  |
 `--------------------------------------------------------------------'
_______________________________________________________

GotW #29:   Strings

Difficulty: 7 / 10
_______________________________________________________


>Write a ci_string class which is identical to the
>standard 'string' class, but is case-insensitive in the
>same way as the C function stricmp():

The "how can I make a case-insensitive string?"
question is so common that it probably deserves its own
FAQ -- hence this issue of GotW.

Note 1:  The stricmp() case-insensitive string
comparison function is not part of the C standard, but
it is a common extension on many C compilers.

Note 2:  What "case insensitive" actually means depends
entirely on your application and language.  For
example, many languages do not have "cases" at all, and
for languages that do you have to decide whether you
want accented characters to compare equal to unaccented
characters, and so on.  This GotW provides guidance on
how to implement case-insensitivity for standard
strings in whatever sense applies to your particular
situation.


Here's what we want to achieve:

>    ci_string s( "AbCdE" );
>
>    // case insensitive
>    assert( s == "abcde" );
>    assert( s == "ABCDE" );
>
>    // still case-preserving, of course
>    assert( strcmp( s.c_str(), "AbCdE" ) == 0 );
>    assert( strcmp( s.c_str(), "abcde" ) != 0 );

The key here is to understand what a "string" actually
is in standard C++.  If you look in your trusty string
header, you'll see something like this:

  typedef basic_string<char> string;

So string isn't really a class... it's a typedef of a
template.  In turn, the basic_string<> template is
declared as follows, in all its glory:

  template<class charT,
           class traits = char_traits<charT>,
           class Allocator = allocator<charT> >
      class basic_string;

So "string" really means "basic_string<char,
char_traits<char>, allocator<char> >".  We don't need
to worry about the allocator part, but the key here is
the char_traits part because char_traits defines how
characters interact and compare(!).

basic_string supplies useful comparison functions that
let you compare whether a string is equal to another,
less than another, and so on.  These string comparisons
functions are built on top of character comparison
functions supplied in the char_traits template.  In
particular, the char_traits template supplies character
comparison functions named eq(), ne(), and lt() for
equality, inequality, and less-than comparisons, and
compare() and find() functions to compare and search
sequences of characters.

If we want these to behave differently, all we have to
do is provide a different char_traits template!  Here's
the easiest way:

  struct ci_char_traits : public char_traits<char>
                // just inherit all the other functions
                //  that we don't need to override
  {
    static bool eq( char c1, char c2 ) {
      return tolower(c1) == tolower(c2);
    }

    static bool ne( char c1, char c2 ) {
      return tolower(c1) != tolower(c2);
    }

    static bool lt( char c1, char c2 ) {
      return tolower(c1) < tolower(c2);
    }

    static int compare( const char* s1,
                        const char* s2,
                        size_t n ) {
      return strnicmp( s1, s2, n );
             // if available on your compiler,
             //  otherwise you can roll your own
    }

    static const char*
    find( const char* s, int n, char a ) {
      while( n-- > 0 && tolower(*s) != tolower(a) ) {
          ++s;
      }
      return s;
    }
  };

And finally, the key that brings it all together:

  typedef basic_string<char, ci_char_traits> ci_string;

All we've done is created a typedef named "ci_string"
which operates exactly like the standard "string",
except that it uses ci_char_traits instead of
char_traits<char> to get its character comparison
rules.  Since we've handily made the ci_char_traits
rules case-insensitive, we've made ci_string itself
case-insensitive without any further surgery -- that
is, we have a case-insensitive string without having
touched basic_string at all!

This GotW should give you a flavour for how the
basic_string template works and how flexible it is in
practice.  If you want different comparisons than the
ones stricmp() and tolower() give you, just replace the
five functions shown above with your own code that
performs character comparisons the way that's
appropriate in your particular application.



Exercise for the reader:

Is it safe to inherit ci_char_traits from
char_traits<char> this way?  Why or why not?