Re: bug in gcc?

[David Given <dg@...>]

Roberto Ierusalimschy wrote:
[...]
> At least in C, the standard defines that the type of a string literal is
> "char*" (not const). But it also states that any attempt to modify the
> contents of a string literal has undefined behavior...

That's correct for C (well, actually it's an array of char), but not for C++,
where it's an array of const char, *except* in this one particular
circumstance. The relevant bits are 2.3.14.1:

http://www.zib.de/benger/C++/clause2.html#s2.13.4

...which describes string literals in general, and 4.2.2:

http://www.zib.de/benger/C++/clause4.html#s4.2

...where it describes the implicit casting behaviour. It's strictly for
compatibility with C, and is labeled DEPRECATED in large letters.
Nevertheless, I don't imagine it's going away any time soon...

-- 
┌── ｄｇ＠ｃｏｗｌａｒｋ．ｃｏｍ ─── http://www.cowlark.com ───────────────────
│ "Parents let children ride bicycles on the street. But parents do not
│ allow children to hear vulgar words. Therefore we can deduce that cursing
│ is more dangerous than being hit by a car." --- Scott Adams

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature