On 12.10.21 10:19, jfondren wrote:
```d
/+ Unfortunately, this isn't reliable.
We could make this work if string literals are put
in read-only memory and we test if s[] is pointing into
that.
/* Peek past end of s[], if it's 0, no conversion necessary.
* Note that the compiler will put a 0 past the end of static
* strings, and the storage allocator will put a 0 past the end
* of newly allocated char[]'s.
*/
char* p = &s[0] + s.length;
if (*p == 0)
return s;
+/
```
[...]
As for whether it's a necessarily a good idea to patch toStringz, I'd
worry that
1. someone will slice a string literal and pass the test while not
having NUL where it's expected
The (commented-out) code checks if the NUL is there. Just make sure that
it's also read-only.
2. people are probably relying by now on toStringz always allocating, to
e.g. safely cast immutable off the result.
It doesn't matter if the result is freshly allocated. Casting away
immutable is only allowed as long as you don't use it to actually change
the data (i.e. it remains de-facto immutable).
