Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> [ shrug... ] The name is not going to change again. I have never cared > >> for the practice of writing strlen("foo") as if it were a compile-time > >> constant. > > > I think with gcc strlen("foo") is a compile-time constant. > > Portability is exactly the root of the problem. If you are in the habit > of doing this then you get led into unportable behaviors like > char localarray[strlen(foo) + 1]; > which no compiler except gcc will take. (We just had to fix exactly > that mistake in someone's patch within the last week or two.)
One idea would be to create a CONST_STRLEN macro that uses sizeof()-1. > > What do you prefer? > > I use "3" ;-). As long as the size calculation and the filling of the > string are immediately adjacent, the purpose of the code is clear > enough. If it is on the same line, yea, it is clear, but often the size refers to something declared several lines away. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly