Related articles |
---|
Pascal vs C style string ? guerin@IRO.UMontreal.CA (1994-06-24) |
Pascal vs C style string ? ssimmons@convex.com (1994-06-26) |
Re: Pascal vs C style string ? prener@watson.ibm.com (1994-06-27) |
Re: Pascal vs C style string ? jhallen@world.std.com (1994-06-27) |
Re: Pascal vs C style string ? ddean@robadome.com (1994-06-27) |
Re: Pascal vs C style string ? boehm@parc.xerox.com (1994-06-27) |
Re: Pascal vs C style string ? nandu@cs.clemson.edu (1994-06-27) |
Re: Pascal vs C style string ? eifrig@beanworld.cs.jhu.edu (1994-06-28) |
Re: Pascal vs C style string ? monnier@di.epfl.ch (Stefan Monnier) (1994-06-28) |
[12 later articles] |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
From: | prener@watson.ibm.com (Dan Prener) |
Keywords: | Pascal, C, design |
Organization: | IBM T.J. Watson Research Center, Hawthorne, New York |
References: | 94-06-175 94-06-195 |
Date: | Mon, 27 Jun 1994 02:56:05 GMT |
guerin@IRO.UMontreal.CA:
> Is there some reasons to use string0 over length attributed string ??
ssimmons@convex.com (Steve Simmons) writes:
> Another minor benefit is the restriction on size. String0 has no
> restriction at all other than the user's memory.
While it is certainly true that the size of length-attributed strings is
constrained by the size of the length field, there is another dimension to
this problem.
The use of zero-terminated strings restricts the contents of strings. They
cannot include the zero byte. Length-attributed strings can contain
arbitrary data.
--
Dan Prener (prener@watson.ibm.com)
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.