The more interesting question

[Andrew Wiley]

On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:46 AM, deadalnix <deadalnix at gmail.com> wrote:

> Le 15/05/2012 18:19, Gor Gyolchanyan a écrit :
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 7:51 PM, Christophe
>> <travert at phare.normalesup.org <mailto:travert at phare.**normalesup.org<travert at phare.normalesup.org>>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>    using printf will lead to a bug each time the programmer forget the
>>    trailing
>>    \0.
>>
>>
>> First of all, printf shouldn't be used! There's writef and it's superior
>> to printf in any way!
>> Second of all, if the zero-termination of literals are to be removed,
>> the literals will no longer be accepted as a pointer to a character.
>> The appropriate type mismatch error will force the user to use toUTF8z
>> to get ht e zero-terminated utf-8 version of the original string.
>> In case it's a literal, one could use the compile-time version of
>> toUTF8z to avoid run-time overhead.
>> This all doesn't sound like a bad idea to me. I don't see any security
>> or performance flaws in this scheme.
>> --
>> Bye,
>> Gor Gyolchanyan.
>>
>
> May god ear you !
>

Unfortunately, using writef/writefln would make DRuntime depend on Phobos,
which is unacceptable.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20120515/27b4e860/attachment.html>