Hello, On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 11:10:48PM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote: > Paul D. Smith wrote: > > I'd much prefer to keep a pointer to the end of the buffer: this won't > > change so it doesn't need to be managed. For example, something like: > > > > char *strpchr(const char *str, const char *endp, int c); > > > > or whatever. > > > > Of course, there aren't any standard str*() or mem*() functions that I'm > > aware of that use an end pointer instead of a length. > > I read this and could not help but notice the similarity to the C++ > STL iterators. However the STL always uses a pointer to one beyond > the end of the data while the above (if I read that correctly) uses a > pointer within the bounds. I am not saying one is better than the > other. Just noting the similarity and the difference. when I read the articles in this thread, I always supposed that endp is pointing beyond the data, i.e. that (endp - str) is the size. I think it would be confusing to do it otherwise. Have a nice day, Stepan _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
