Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C++ > compare string and "" string literal

Reply
Thread Tools

compare string and "" string literal

 
 
lovecreatesbea...@gmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-24-2007
Is it correct and safe to compare a string object with "", a pair of
quotation marks quoted empty string?If the string object: s = ""; does
s contain a single '\'? Is it better to use std::string::size or
std::string::empty to deal with this condition? Thank you.

string s = "";
if (s == "");
if (s.size == 0);
if (s.empty());

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
lovecreatesbea...@gmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-24-2007


On 1月24日, 上午10时41分, "(E-Mail Removed)"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Is it correct and safe to compare a string object with "", a pair of
> quotation marks quoted empty string?If the string object: s = ""; does
> s contain a single '\'? Is it better to use std::string::size or
> std::string::empty to deal with this condition? Thank you.
>
> string s = "";
> if (s == "");
> if (s.size == 0);
> if (s.empty());


(sorry for the mistakes in my previous post)

Is it correct and safe to compare a string object with "", a pair of
quotation marks quoted empty string? If the string object: s = ""; does
s contain a single '\0'? Is it better to use std::string::size or
std::string::empty to deal with this condition?

string s = "";
if (s == "");
if (s.size == 0);
if (s.empty());

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Michael DOUBEZ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-24-2007
(E-Mail Removed) a écrit :
>
>
> Is it correct and safe to compare a string object with "", a pair of
> quotation marks quoted empty string?


Yes, the compiler creates a temporary string initialized with "" to
perform the comparison.

> If the string object: s = ""; does
> s contain a single '\0'?


This is implementation depedant, the only requirement is that the
c_str() method returns a POD char* which is 0 terminated.

> Is it better to use std::string::size or
> std::string::empty to deal with this condition?


Unless you have a specific reason to do otherwise, the
std::string::empty is the clearer.

>
> string s = "";
> if (s == "");

Costs a intermediary object and a call to a comparison function unless
there is some kind of optimisation (?).

> if (s.size == 0);

It is to note that std::string::size complexity may be linear in the
container's size; but it should work fine with main string implementations.

> if (s.empty());

It may be equivalent to a.size() == 0 but it is expected to run in
amortized constant time; it may be faster if that does count.


Michael
 
Reply With Quote
 
Roland Pibinger
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-24-2007
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 08:53:19 +0100, Michael DOUBEZ wrote:
>(E-Mail Removed) a écrit :
>> Is it correct and safe to compare a string object with "", a pair of
>> quotation marks quoted empty string?

>
>Yes, the compiler creates a temporary string initialized with "" to
>perform the comparison.


The compiler does not create a temporary string. Some implementations
internally create a temporary string but that is a different question.

Best wishes,
Roland Pibinger
 
Reply With Quote
 
Michael DOUBEZ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-24-2007
Roland Pibinger a 閏rit :
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 08:53:19 +0100, Michael DOUBEZ wrote:
>> (E-Mail Removed) a écrit :
>>> Is it correct and safe to compare a string object with "", a pair of
>>> quotation marks quoted empty string?

>> Yes, the compiler creates a temporary string initialized with "" to
>> perform the comparison.

>
> The compiler does not create a temporary string. Some implementations
> internally create a temporary string but that is a different question.


Which implementation are you talking about, the compiler's or the
library's ?

The standard defines only:
bool std::string:perator==(const string& c1, const string& c2);

So encoutering:
s == "blah"

The compiler matched "blah" as a string through the relevant constructor:
std::string::string( const char* str );

And uses an intermediary object. Now, dependending on the implementation
of operator== and the constructor, the actual instanciation of a
std::string may be avoided by the compiler. Is it what you mean ?

Regards,
Michael







 
Reply With Quote
 
Roland Pibinger
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-24-2007
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 10:29:00 +0100, Michael DOUBEZ wrote:
>Roland Pibinger a 閏rit :
>> On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 08:53:19 +0100, Michael DOUBEZ wrote:
>>> (E-Mail Removed) a écrit :
>>>> Is it correct and safe to compare a string object with "", a pair of
>>>> quotation marks quoted empty string?
>>> Yes, the compiler creates a temporary string initialized with "" to
>>> perform the comparison.

>>
>> The compiler does not create a temporary string. Some implementations
>> internally create a temporary string but that is a different question.

>
>Which implementation are you talking about, the compiler's or the
>library's ?


the library

>The standard defines only:
>bool std::string:perator==(const string& c1, const string& c2);


In 21.2 the C++ Standard defines the following function templates:

template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator>
bool operator==(const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& lhs,
const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& rhs);

template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator>
bool operator==(const charT* lhs,
const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& rhs);

template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator>
bool operator==(const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& lhs,
const charT* rhs);

Implementations of the latter two templates need not create a
temporary string object.

Best regards,
Roland Pibinger
 
Reply With Quote
 
Michael DOUBEZ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-24-2007
Roland Pibinger a 閏rit :
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 10:29:00 +0100, Michael DOUBEZ wrote:
>> Roland Pibinger a 閏rit :
>>> On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 08:53:19 +0100, Michael DOUBEZ wrote:
>>>> (E-Mail Removed) a écrit :
>>>>> Is it correct and safe to compare a string object with "", a pair of
>>>>> quotation marks quoted empty string?
>>>> Yes, the compiler creates a temporary string initialized with "" to
>>>> perform the comparison.
>>> The compiler does not create a temporary string. Some implementations
>>> internally create a temporary string but that is a different question.

>> Which implementation are you talking about, the compiler's or the
>> library's ?

>
> the library
>
>> The standard defines only:
>> bool std::string:perator==(const string& c1, const string& c2);

>
> In 21.2 the C++ Standard defines the following function templates:
>
> template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator>
> bool operator==(const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& lhs,
> const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& rhs);
>
> template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator>
> bool operator==(const charT* lhs,
> const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& rhs);
>
> template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator>
> bool operator==(const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& lhs,
> const charT* rhs);
>
> Implementations of the latter two templates need not create a
> temporary string object.


You are right, I had never seen it.
But then, what about section 21.3.8.2:

template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator>
bool operator==(const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& lhs,
const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& rhs);

1 Returns:lhs.compare(rhs) == 0.

template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator>
bool operator==(const charT* lhs,
const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& rhs);

2 Returns:basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>(lhs) == rhs.

template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator>
bool operator==(const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& lhs,
const charT* rhs);

3 Returns:lhs == basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>(rhs).


Michael



 
Reply With Quote
 
Roland Pibinger
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-24-2007
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 11:14:46 +0100, Michael DOUBEZ wrote:
>But then, what about section 21.3.8.2:
>
>template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator>
>bool operator==(const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& lhs,
>const charT* rhs);
>
>3 Returns:lhs == basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>(rhs).


I'd call that a contradiction in terms.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ron Natalie
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-24-2007
(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

> Is it correct and safe to compare a string object with "", a pair of
> quotation marks quoted empty string? If the string object: s = ""; does
> s contain a single '\0'? Is it better to use std::string::size or
> std::string::empty to deal with this condition?
>


You must realize that once you have a std::string, the null char has
no special meaning.

However, the std::string member functions that accept parameters of
char* (and no explicit length) effectively do what "strlen" does to
compute the length. Hence "" in the context of these parameters
is zero sized NOT an array of one char of '\0'.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bo Persson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-24-2007
Roland Pibinger wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 11:14:46 +0100, Michael DOUBEZ wrote:
>> But then, what about section 21.3.8.2:
>>
>> template<class charT, class traits, class Allocator>
>> bool operator==(const basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>& lhs,
>> const charT* rhs);
>>
>> 3 Returns:lhs == basic_string<charT,traits,Allocator>(rhs).

>
> I'd call that a contradiction in terms.


Sort of, but not really.

The "Returns:" element of the description prescribes the value returned by
the function/operator, not how the value has to be computed.

An implementor can note that basic_string::compare() is overloaded for const
charT*, and use

lhs.compare(rhs) == 0

instead.


Bo Persson


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What's wrong with rpc-literal? Why use doc-literal? Anonieko Ramos ASP .Net Web Services 0 09-27-2004 09:06 AM
String literal and const al C Programming 7 12-20-2003 05:12 AM
String, String literal ? Could anyone explain to me ? herrcho C Programming 7 09-26-2003 04:54 PM
string literal as const string& parameter selder21@hotmail.com C++ 5 09-22-2003 11:50 AM
String literal and String Object Prakash Prabhu Java 3 08-27-2003 09:18 PM



Advertisments