On 2013-11-20 12:16, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
You'd do it the other way around by having something likeValidatedString!char s = validateString("hello world");
Right.
ValidatedString would then avoid any extra validation when iterating over the characters, though I don't know how much of an efficiency gain that would actually be given that much of the validation occurs naturally when decoding or using stride. It would have the downside that any function which specializes on strings would likely have to then specialize on ValidatedString as well. So, while I agree with the idea in concept, I'd propose that we benchmark the difference in decoding and striding without the checks and see if there actually is much difference. Because if there isn't, then I don't think that it's worth going to the trouble of adding something like ValidatedString.
If not just if the string is valid UTF-8. There can be many other types of valid strings. Or rather other functions that have additional requirements. Like sanitized filenames, HTML/SQL escaped strings and so on.
-- /Jacob Carlborg
