From: Pavol Droba (droba_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-01-17 06:19:54
shunsuke wrote:
> Pavol Droba wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> shunsuke wrote:
>>> Pavol Droba wrote:
>>>> Not necessary. Why couldn't we take the whole array as a string when no
>>>> null character is present?
>>> It means as_literal will not have constant complexity?
>>>
>> as_literal doesn't have contant complexity even now, since it works with
>> c-strings. It has constant complexity only in case of arrays and that's
>> only because the implementation is wrong.
>
> If so, as_literal should have been named as "as_c_str", IMO.
>
Since as_literal is used quite some time already, I don't see any
compelling reason to rename it.
Regards,
Pavol.