How bad is code using std::basic_string<t> as a contiguous buffer?
Posted
by BillyONeal
on Stack Overflow
See other posts from Stack Overflow
or by BillyONeal
Published on 2010-02-13T01:36:10Z
Indexed on
2010/04/02
0:53 UTC
Read the original article
Hit count: 526
I know technically the std::basic_string
template is not required to have contiguous memory. However, I'm curious how many implementations exist for modern compilers that actually take advantage of this freedom. For example, if one wants code like the following it seems silly to allocate a vector just to turn around instantly and return it as a string:
DWORD valueLength = 0;
DWORD type;
LONG errorCheck = RegQueryValueExW(
hWin32,
value.c_str(),
NULL,
&type,
NULL,
&valueLength);
if (errorCheck != ERROR_SUCCESS)
WindowsApiException::Throw(errorCheck);
else if (valueLength == 0)
return std::wstring();
std::wstring buffer;
do
{
buffer.resize(valueLength/sizeof(wchar_t));
errorCheck = RegQueryValueExW(
hWin32,
value.c_str(),
NULL,
&type,
&buffer[0],
&valueLength);
} while (errorCheck == ERROR_MORE_DATA);
if (errorCheck != ERROR_SUCCESS)
WindowsApiException::Throw(errorCheck);
return buffer;
I know code like this might slightly reduce portability because it implies that std::wstring is contiguous -- but I'm wondering just how unportable that makes this code. Put another way, how may compilers actually take advantage of the freedom having noncontiguous memory allows?
Oh: And of course given what the code's doing this only matters for Windows compilers.
© Stack Overflow or respective owner