I'm working in a C, and C++ program. We used to be compiling without the make-strings-writable option. But that was getting a bunch of warnings, so I turned it off.
Then I got a whole bunch of errors of the form "Cannot convert const char* to char* in argmuent 3 of function foo". So, I went through and made a whole lot of changes to fix those.
However, today, the program CRASHED because the literal "" was getting passed into a function that was expecting a char*, and was setting the 0th character to 0. It wasn't doing anything bad, just trying to edit a constant, and crashing.
My question is, why wasn't that a compiler error?
In case it matters, this was on a mac compiled with gcc-4.0.
EDIT: added code:
char * host = FindArgDefault("EMailLinkHost", "");
stripCRLF(linkHost, '\n');
where:
char *FindArgDefault(char *argName, char *defVal)
{// simplified
char * val = defVal;
return(val);
}
and
void stripCRLF(char *str, char delim)
{
char *p, *q;
for (p = q = str; *p; ++p) {
if (*p == 0xd || *p == 0xa) {
if (p[1] == (*p ^ 7)) ++p;
if (delim == -1) *p = delim;
}
*q++ = *p;
}
*q = 0; // DIES HERE
}
This compiled and ran until it tried to set *q to 0...
EDIT 2:
Most people seem to be missing the point of my question. I know why char foo[] = "bar" works. I know why char * foo = "bar"; doesn't work.
My question is mostly with respect to passing parameters. One thing that occures to me is "Is it possible that this is a C vs C++ issue?" because I have some .c files and some .cpp files, and it's quite possible that C allows it, but C++ doesn't... or vice versa...
The standard specifies a special rule allowing the literal-to-char*
conversion which quietly drops const
qualification. (4.2/2):
A string literal (2.13.4) that is not a wide string literal can be converted to an rvalue of type “pointer to char”; a wide string literal can be converted to an rvalue of type “pointer to wchar_t”. In either case, the result is a pointer to the first element of the array. This conversion is considered only when there is an explicit appropriate pointer target type, and not when there is a general need to convert from an lvalue to an rvalue. [Note: this conversion is deprecated. See Annex D. ]
The C++0x standard takes that deprecation further… this nonsense rule is removed entirely from the upcoming standard.
The const char*
to char*
error must be a result of converting a literal to a const char*
first.
Using a string literal to initialize a char *
pointer in C++ is a deprecated feature, but nevertheless it is legal. It is not an error. It is your responsibility to make sure that no modification attempts are made through such a pointer.
In other words, you must be misunderstanding something about the compilation errors you got earlier. I don't think you ever got any errors for such an initialization/assignment. The "Cannot convert const char* to char*" errors you mention in your question must have been produced by something else.
Note, that the fact that you can initialize char *
pointer with a string literal does not mean that you can use any arbitrary const char *
value to initialize a char *
pointer. This code
const char *pc = "A";
char *p = pc;
will produce an error, while this
char *p = "A";
will not. The aforementioned deprecated feature applies to string literals only, not for all const char *
pointers.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With