This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

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


On Sat, 2004-06-12 at 09:29, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 12 Jun 2004 09:13:48 +0530, Dhruv Matani <dhruvbird@gmx.net> wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 2004-06-12 at 00:13, Martin Sebor wrote:
> 
> >> Constructing the empty string is IMO perfectly reasonable, harmless, and
> >> has no adverse performance impact over the current behavior (the one if
> >> that the requirement is presumably trying to eliminate is there anyway
> >> in implementations that throw).
> >
> > Ok, that means that there are 2 definitions of *the empty string*?
> >
> > 1. char* str1 = 0;
> > 2. char* str2 = "\0";
> >
> > So, according to your definition, both str1 and str2 are empty strings,
> > having different representations?
> 
> No.  The first one is null, the second one is an unusual string containing
> two null characters.  The empty string is "".
> 
> Martin's suggestion was that.
> 
> 1. string s1 (0);
> 2. string s2 ("");
> 
> would be equivalent.

Yes, sorry about the mistake!

BTW, would "" be equivalent to '\0'?

-- 
        -Dhruv Matani.
http://www.geocities.com/dhruvbird/

Proud to be a Vegetarian.
http://www.vegetarianstarterkit.com/
http://www.vegkids.com/vegkids/index.html



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]