The more interesting question

[deadalnix]

Le 15/05/2012 21:57, Andrew Wiley a écrit :
> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:46 AM, deadalnix <deadalnix at gmail.com
> <mailto: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>
>         <mailto:travert at phare.__normalesup.org
>         <mailto: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.
>

druntime isn't supposed to printf stuff.