STINNER Victor <victor.stin...@haypocalc.com> added the comment:
> Unicode objects are NUL-terminated, but only very external APIs
> rely on this (e.g. code using the Windows Unicode API).
All Py_UNICODE_str*() functions rely on the NUL character. They are useful when
patching a function from bytes (char*) to unicode (PyUnicodeObject): the API is
very close. It is possible to avoid them with new functions using the strings
length.
All functions using PyUNICODE* as wchar_t* to the Windows wide character API
(*W functions) also rely on the NUL character. Python core uses a lot of these
functions. Don't write a NUL character require to create a temporary new string
ending with a NUL character. It is not efficient, especially on long strings.
And there is the problem of all third party modules (written in C) relying on
the NUL character.
I think that we have good reasons to not remove the NUL character. So I think
that we can continue to accept that unicode[length] character can be read. Eg.
implement text.startswith("ab") as "p=PyUnicode_AS_UNICODE(text); if (p[0] ==
'a' && p[1] == 'b')" without checking the length of text.
Using the NUL character or the length as a terminator condition doesn't really
matter. I just see one advantage for the NUL character: it is faster in some
cases.
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue8821>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
