[Issue 8229] string literals are not zero-terminated during CTFE

2015-01-20 Thread via Digitalmars-d-bugs
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8229 --- Comment #6 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com --- I'd just introduce a sample code. From the comment in issue 7570: bool not_end(const char *s, const int n) { return s s[n]; } bool str_prefix(const char *s, const char *t, const int ns,

[Issue 8229] string literals are not zero-terminated during CTFE

2013-09-28 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8229 --- Comment #5 from Martin Nowak c...@dawg.eu 2013-09-28 04:20:53 PDT --- It is also a huge performance issue to use ArrayLiteralExp instead of StringLiteralExp during object emission because the compiler creates a list of 1-byte elements. If

[Issue 8229] string literals are not zero-terminated during CTFE

2013-09-27 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8229 Martin Nowak c...@dawg.eu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||c...@dawg.eu

[Issue 8229] string literals are not zero-terminated during CTFE

2012-06-13 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8229 --- Comment #3 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2012-06-13 01:44:42 PDT --- (In reply to comment #2) (In reply to comment #1) This behaviour is intentional. Pointer operations are strictly checked in CTFE. It's the same as doing int

[Issue 8229] string literals are not zero-terminated during CTFE

2012-06-12 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8229 Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clugd...@yahoo.com.au ---

[Issue 8229] string literals are not zero-terminated during CTFE

2012-06-12 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8229 --- Comment #2 from timon.g...@gmx.ch 2012-06-12 10:55:45 PDT --- (In reply to comment #1) This behaviour is intentional. Pointer operations are strictly checked in CTFE. It's the same as doing int n = 0; char c = [n]; which