> The STL could seriously use some improvements. std::string doesn't do most of the stuff you want with a string std::string predates the STL and most of unic

> The STL could seriously use some improvements. std::string doesn't do most of the stuff you want with a string std::string predates the STL and most of unicodes history. It was supposed to a be an alternative for using C functions for manipulating NTBS's, nothing more. Since then we've only really had 3 standard revisions, and most languages that see constant evolution still haven't got unicode right... > Having a std::vector::append() would be really nice, so I don't have to remember that C++ uses something completely different from every other language I can think of a bunch of languages that don't use "append" for pushing on to the back of a dynamic array. JavaScript for instance, which uses "push" > I'm wondering if we ought to start thinking about a C++2.0 where we can write the C++ that we've learned we want. The Ranges proposal/TS goes quite far in this direction. See Eric Nieblers range-v3 library as a testing ground.