RE: [Dev-C++] Errorhandling

[Ioannis V. <no...@ya...>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev...@li...=20
> [mailto:dev...@li...] On Behalf=20
> Of Jason Hardman
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 12:13 AM
> To: Dev-C++
> Subject: Re: [Dev-C++] Errorhandling
>=20
>=20
> I think the strcat(szDatei, " \0") was to insert a space=20
> between the comand line arguments when concatenating them.=20

The proper in this case would be: strcat(sdDatei, " ");


> Any string literal will be automatically NULL terminated=20
> anyway, but putting in the extra NULL wouldn't cause any harm=20
> as strcat would just ignore it. A C++ string would be better,

We do not know if it would ignore it, it could end up in a concatenated
string having a double '\0', and in the next call of strcat() it could
end up in something like that:

[stringonestringtwo\0stringthree...\0]

That is we do not know how a strcat() implementation works (perhaps from
the end towards the beginning) and it could replace the last '\0' only.
In any case that '\0' is not needed.
=20
> but perhaps he was intentionally writing in pure C?

Perhaps, but he spoke for exceptions so i assumed knowledge of C++ so i
assumed C++. :)


> I've been haveing a look at the C99 standard of late and some=20
> of the developments in there would make it useful to use C=20
> instead of C++. C is no longer a subset of C++, although=20

C99 is not a subset of C++ but i can;t find a reason why using C99 would
be more useful than  C++ (i think exactly the opposite).

> maybe in future they will extend C++ to include at least some=20
> of the inovations? Of course I don't think that the compiler=20

Only very few.


Ioannis

* Ioannis Vranos
* Programming pages: http://www.noicys.f2s.com
* Alternative URL: http://run.to/noicys