This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix the damage done by my other patch from yesterday to strlenopt-49.c
On Mon, 30 Jul 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 03:52:39PM +0000, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Jul 2018, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> > > In the moment I would already be happy if all STRING_CSTs would
> > > be zero terminated.
> > generic.texi says they need not be. Making the STRING_CST contain only
> > the bytes of the initializer and not the trailing NUL in the C case where
> > the trailing NUL does not fit in the object initialized would of course
> > mean you get non-NUL-terminated STRING_CSTs for valid C code as well.
> One thing is whether TREE_STRING_LENGTH includes the trailing NUL byte,
> that doesn't need to be the case e.g. for the shortened initializers.
> The other thing is whether we as a convenience for the compiler's internals
> want to waste some memory for the NUL termination; I think we could avoid
> some bugs that way.
TREE_STRING_LENGTH includes the NUL if it is logically part of the object,
but should not if the NUL is purely an implementation convenience.
Joseph S. Myers