Farid Zaripov wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 8:23 PM
To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: STDCXX tests fails and reasons [MSVC]
Jira for the "bug in rw_match(&char, &char, 1)."
But is that really a bug in rw_match()? It looks to me
more like a design limitation than a bug. In the case of the
wchar_t* and UserChar* overloads of rw_match() there should
be a simple solution: make sure the first (char*) argument
has enough elements (it should be easy to guarantee that
since the argument is the hardcoded string we match against).
And changing the char* overload to behave the same as the
other two, i.e., to only do the expansion on the first
argument and not on the second should fix that case, no?
The problem is in that rw_match() used to compare single characters.
There no problem in compare one character NUL-terminated string
(i.e. "b" or "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"). We should not use rw_match() to compare
single characters.
I think something like rw_match("b", "[EMAIL PROTECTED]") should work, just
as long as we do the special processing on just one of the two
arguments (the second one in this case) and not both. The
problem, as I understand it, is that we process both strings
in the (char*, char*) case.
Martin
