Diez B. Roggisch a écrit : > Christophe wrote: > >> Diez B. Roggisch a écrit : >>> The code _generated_ by the java compiler, and the C++ compiler, is not >>> the issue here. If you as a programmer can write "a" + "b", its fine. >>> Which is a thing to reach in C++, a bazillion of string-classes have been >>> written.... >>> >>> >>> and in C++, you can do: >>> >>> char *a = "1"; >>> char *b = "2"; >>> char *c = a + b; >>> >>> But with a totally different, unexpected outcome.. I know where *I* start >>> laughing here. >> That code doesn't even compile. And you shouldn't be using the char* >> compatibility strings in C++ if possible. > > It was out of my head. I remember producing some wicked pointer arithmetic > example of similar ridicule. > > And the whole argument is about java having a lot of design decisions that > make it easier to work with is actually strengthened when you say that "you > shouldn't use the char* ..." - because its not forbidden, and maybe someone > else didn't follow that suggestion. I remember quite a few times calling > the stl-string-to-char-function (no idea how that is called now)
Well, char* really is a compatibility feature in my mind. And it IS useful. How else would you interface C++ with existing C code and libraries :) That was the most probable reason you were using the STL to char* function. Same for the const_cast. You shouldn't use it, but sometimes, you have to interface with a C api that takes a non const char* as paramter, despite the fact that it won't modify it in any way. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
