Mike Gran <spk...@yahoo.com> writes:
> Right now it seems that zero-length shared substring of a wide string is
> wide. A zero-length substring still shares the stringbuf of the
> original string.
[...]
> What do you think about that? Do zero-length substrings need to
> still share stringbufs with their parent strings?
I think the answer is: no they don't, and avoiding that might be a
worthwhile optimization, mainly to avoid needlessly holding a reference
to a potentially large stringbuf.
> In any case, a string-copy of a narrow substring of an otherwise wide string
> should be a new narrow string. This should apply to zero-length
> substrings as well. This isn't happening, because we're missing
> a scm_i_try_narrow_string in string-copy, which is a bug.
I just fixed this.
> Looks like for zero-length input strings, u32_conv_from_encoding can
> return NULL.
Interesting! Anyway, we now avoid calling `u32_conv_from_encoding' for
empty strings.
Thanks,
Mark
