Re: Avoiding string segfaults

[LLeweLLyn Reese <llewelly at lifesupport dot shutdown dot com>]

Yves BAILLY <kafka.fr@netcourrier.com> writes:

> Hello all,
> 
> This is my first post on this list. Sorry if it's not the right place
> for my query.
> 
> Look at this simple code :
> 
>  1 #include <string>
>  2 #include <iostream>
>  3  
>  4 int main(int argc, char* argv[])
>  5 {
>  6     string s1("some string") ;
>  7     string s2((char*)0) ;

Line 7 has undefined behavior. It's been 6 months since I looked at
  the standard tho, so I can't quote chapter and verse.

>  8  
>  9     cout << "s1 = [" << s1 << "]" << endl ;
> 10     cout << "s2 = [" << s2 << "]" << endl ;
> 11 }
> 
> It will segfault before displaying anything, due to line 7. This occures
> when I try to build a string from a null pointer.
> Looking at the code for the string class (basic_string actually), I didn't
> find any check against a null-pointer when building a string from a
> char*.

There's no requirement (in the ISO C++ standard) for one - but it
  might be convienient to print (null) or some such in this case.

> Is this the wanted behaviour ? Would it be bad to build an empty string
> from a null pointer ?

Yes.

I use:

  string s1;

or:

  string s1("");

to build empty strings.

> 
> Sorry for bothering you, if this has already been discussed and
> closed.

You'll probably get faster (and more interesting) responses from
  comp.lang.c++.moderated . This list is actually for developing libstdc++.
[snip]