bjacob wrote: @jrtc27 > const char[] allocates storage for the string contents though, so takes up > space in memory if the string can be merged with others at compile or link > time. There are multiple things being traded off here, and PDE vs PIC/PIE > complicates the story further. So it's not just as simple as "use const > char[] whenever you can".
Ah, thanks for the explanation... I really hadn't thought of that, but IIUC you're saying that the indirection (referring to a string via a pointer to it) allows merging storage when a string literal is a substring of another, while using raw `const char[]` doesn't allow any reuse unless the string literal exactly match. Really interesting, but I still wonder -- this sounds like a fancier kind of optimization that probably won't be able to apply in a majority of cases (it needs literals to be substrings of each other?) while the relocations are every single time. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122366 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
