Re: [RFC] std::string(0);

[Martin Sebor <sebor at roguewave dot com>]

Daniel Frey wrote:

> Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 02:50:36PM +0200, Daniel Frey wrote:
> >
> > > I would like to suggest a small improvement to basic_string. As the 
> > > subject already says, it's about std::string(0);
> > >
> > > Obviously, it's illegal to pass a const char* to the ctor of 
> > > basic_string that is zero. The current implementation results in a 
> > > SEGV. I would like to catch *some* of the cases at compile-time 
> > > instead of having a crashing program. :)

A conforming implementation is not allowed to reject constructs
such as std::string (0) just because they might cause undefined
behavior at runtime. Consider this well-formed program:

    #include <string>
    int main () {
        if (0) std::string (0);
    }

Martin