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
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