Re: Pascal vs C style string ?

nickh@harlequin.co.uk (Nick Haines)
Fri, 1 Jul 1994 10:04:49 GMT

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[13 earlier articles]
Re: Pascal vs C style string ? boehm@parc.xerox.com (1994-06-28)
Re: Pascal vs C style string ? cjmchale@dsg.cs.tcd.ie (1994-06-29)
Re: Pascal vs C style string ? nandu@cs.clemson.edu (1994-06-29)
Re: Pascal vs C style string ? Theo.Norvell@comlab.oxford.ac.uk (1994-06-30)
Re: Pascal vs C style string ? guerin@IRO.UMontreal.CA (1994-06-30)
Re: Pascal vs C style string ? synaptx!thymus!daveg@uunet.uu.net (Dave Gillespie) (1994-06-30)
Re: Pascal vs C style string ? nickh@harlequin.co.uk (1994-07-01)
Re: Pascal vs C style string ? mps@dent.uchicago.edu (1994-07-05)
| List of all articles for this month |
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: nickh@harlequin.co.uk (Nick Haines)
Keywords: C, Pascal, design
Organization: Harlequin Limited, Cambridge, England
References: 94-06-175 94-06-225
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 1994 10:04:49 GMT

andrew@cee.hw.ac.uk (Andrew Dinn) writes:


      Pascal merely differs from C in two respects: i) it requires the length of
      strings/byte arrays to be fixed at compile time ii) there is no library of
      string functions based around the *convention* that the interesting bytes
      are the ones which come before the NUL. The limitation which Pascal
      suffers and C does not is the former.


I agree wrt Pascal, but this dumb restriction does not apply to all
languages which use length-attributed strings. The use of string0 in
the C library has left some of us with no alternative but to rewrite
chunks of the library, just so we can include all valid characters
(including NUL) in a character string.


Nick Haines nickh@harlequin.co.uk
--


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.