In C++11, we know that std::string
is guaranteed to be both contiguous and null-terminated (or more pedantically, terminated by charT()
, which in the case of char
is the null character 0).
There is this C API I need to use that fills in a string by pointer. It writes the whole string + null terminator. In C++03, I was always forced to use a vector<char>
, because I couldn't assume that string
was contiguous or null-terminated. But in C++11 (assuming a properly conforming basic_string
class, which is still iffy in some standard libraries), I can.
Or can I? When I do this:
std::string str(length);
The string will allocate length+1
bytes, with the last filled in by the null-terminator. That's good. But when I pass this off to the C API, it's going to write length+1
characters. It's going to overwrite the null-terminator.
Admittedly, it's going to overwrite the null-terminator with a null character. Odds are good that this will work (indeed, I can't imagine how it couldn't work).
But I don't care about what "works". I want to know, according to the spec, whether it's OK to overwrite the null-terminator with a null character?
LWG 2475 made this valid by editing the specification of operator[](size())
(inserted text in bold):
Otherwise, returns a reference to an object of type charT
with value
charT()
, where modifying the object to any value other than charT()
leads to undefined behavior.
Unfortunately, this is UB, if I interpret the wording correct (in any case, it's not allowed):
§21.4.5 [string.access] p2
Returns: *(begin() + pos)
if pos < size()
, otherwise a reference to an object of type T
with value charT()
; the referenced value shall not be modified.
(Editorial error that it says T
not charT
.)
.data()
and .c_str()
basically point back to operator[]
(§21.4.7.1 [string.accessors] p1
):
Returns: A pointer p
such that p + i == &operator[](i)
for each i
in [0,size()]
.
According to the spec, overwriting the terminating NUL
should be undefined behavior.
So, the right thing to do would be to allocate length+1
characters in the string, pass the string buffer to the C API, and then resize()
back to length
:
// "+ 1" to make room for the terminating NUL for the C API
std::string str(length + 1);
// Call the C API passing &str[0] to safely write to the string buffer
...
// Resize back to length
str.resize(length);
(FWIW, I tried the "overwriting NUL" approach on MSVC10, and it works fine.)
I suppose n3092 isn't current any more but that's what I have. Section 21.4.5 allows access to a single element. It requires pos <= size(). If pos < size() then you get the actual element, otherwise (i.e. if pos == size()) then you get a non-modifiable reference.
I think that as far as the programming language is concerned, a kind of access which could modify the value is considered a modification even if the new value is the same as the old value.
Does g++ have a pedantic library that you can link to?