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
