Le vendredi 24 mars 2023 à 19:20 -0400, Jeffrey Walton a écrit : > The type that I'm proposing does not have NUL byte appended to the > data > > always and automatically, because I think it is more important to > > have a > > string_desc_substring function that does not cause memory > > allocation, > > than to have string_desc_c function (conversion to 'char *') that > > does > > not cause memory allocation. > > I would take caution if not including a NULL. A natural thing to want > to do is print a string, and C-based routines usually expect a > terminating NULL. > > Also, if you initialize the struct, then the allocated string will > likely include a terminating NULL. I understand the size member will > omit the NULL, but it will be present anyways in the string. (Unless > you do something ugly, like spell out the characters of the string).
>From what I understand, the proposed substring function cannot add a NUL byte without doing a copy first. Vivien
