On 25 October 2013 13:28, John Gilmore <jwgli...@gmail.com> wrote: > Apart from its vulnerability to security-breaching abuses and the fact > that it must often be copied to be operated upon, another major defect > of ther nul-terminated string is that it may not contain a nul. > > I do not regard the nul-terminated string as a serious, i.e., > non-frivolous data type. Oddly enough, however, it is entirely > feasible to pad nul-terminated strings with more nuls to make all of > the elements of a set of them equal in length.
I imagine the lover of null-terminated strings would argue that everything beyond the terminating null (and perhaps even it) is not part of the string. Certainly the C str... functions will do nothing with nulls beyond at most the first. Tony H.
