Access elements in std::string where positon of string is greater than its size The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern) The Ask Question Wizard is Live! Data science time! April 2019 and salary with experienceWhat's the best way to trim std::string?How to convert std::string to lower case?How to convert a std::string to const char* or char*?std::wstring VS std::stringDoes std::string find require that pos be less than the string size?Are the days of passing const std::string & as a parameter over?Is a std::string implementation conformant where 's.c_str() + s.size()' is not necessarily the same as '&s[s.size()]'?Why is f(i = -1, i = -1) undefined behavior?In C++11 and beyond does std::string::operator[] do bounds checking?What made i = i++ + 1; legal in C++17?
How to politely respond to generic emails requesting a PhD/job in my lab? Without wasting too much time
How to split my screen on my Macbook Air?
Word for: a synonym with a positive connotation?
What LEGO pieces have "real-world" functionality?
Cooking pasta in a water boiler
How many people can fit inside Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion?
What is special about square numbers here?
What aspect of planet Earth must be changed to prevent the industrial revolution?
What information about me do stores get via my credit card?
Match Roman Numerals
What's the point in a preamp?
Was credit for the black hole image misattributed?
Can a 1st-level character have an ability score above 18?
Relations between two reciprocal partial derivatives?
"... to apply for a visa" or "... and applied for a visa"?
Can the DM override racial traits?
Does Parliament hold absolute power in the UK?
Road tyres vs "Street" tyres for charity ride on MTB Tandem
In horse breeding, what is the female equivalent of putting a horse out "to stud"?
First use of “packing” as in carrying a gun
Didn't get enough time to take a Coding Test - what to do now?
Do warforged have souls?
What can I do if neighbor is blocking my solar panels intentionally?
Sort a list of pairs representing an acyclic, partial automorphism
Access elements in std::string where positon of string is greater than its size
The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)
The Ask Question Wizard is Live!
Data science time! April 2019 and salary with experienceWhat's the best way to trim std::string?How to convert std::string to lower case?How to convert a std::string to const char* or char*?std::wstring VS std::stringDoes std::string find require that pos be less than the string size?Are the days of passing const std::string & as a parameter over?Is a std::string implementation conformant where 's.c_str() + s.size()' is not necessarily the same as '&s[s.size()]'?Why is f(i = -1, i = -1) undefined behavior?In C++11 and beyond does std::string::operator[] do bounds checking?What made i = i++ + 1; legal in C++17?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;
In case of std::string, if we access an element where (element position) == (size of string)
the standard says that it returns a reference to an object of type charT
with value charT()
.
const_reference operator[](size_type pos) const;
reference operator[](size_type pos);
Expects: pos <= size().
Returns: *(begin() + pos) if pos < size(). Otherwise, returns a
reference to an object of type charT with value charT(), where
modifying the object to any value other than charT() leads to
undefined behavior.
http://eel.is/c++draft/strings#string.access-1
Unfortunately I couldn't reason about this, it would have been better if it has been Undefined Behavior.
Can somebody explain the rationale behind this?
c++ string c++11 language-lawyer
|
show 11 more comments
In case of std::string, if we access an element where (element position) == (size of string)
the standard says that it returns a reference to an object of type charT
with value charT()
.
const_reference operator[](size_type pos) const;
reference operator[](size_type pos);
Expects: pos <= size().
Returns: *(begin() + pos) if pos < size(). Otherwise, returns a
reference to an object of type charT with value charT(), where
modifying the object to any value other than charT() leads to
undefined behavior.
http://eel.is/c++draft/strings#string.access-1
Unfortunately I couldn't reason about this, it would have been better if it has been Undefined Behavior.
Can somebody explain the rationale behind this?
c++ string c++11 language-lawyer
5
@user463035818 no that's not true. Subscript operator [] does not perform a check.string::at()
does and for that reason it throws
– KostasRim
Apr 9 at 8:30
7
Doesn't violating "Expects:pos <= size()
" lead to UB straight away? The "Otherwise" refers only to thepos == size
case, no?
– Max Langhof
Apr 9 at 8:30
7
exactly I think the crux is "Expects: pos <= size()." if you dont follow the precondition you are in UB land anyhow, so it is just about accesing the "end" of the string
– user463035818
Apr 9 at 8:31
7
@AImx1 Where does the standard say that violating an "Expects" clause is anything other than UB?
– Max Langhof
Apr 9 at 8:31
2
For a C-style string of length X, using the index X will give you the null-terminator.std::string
simply tries to emulate that. Going beyond will always lead to UB.
– Some programmer dude
Apr 9 at 8:32
|
show 11 more comments
In case of std::string, if we access an element where (element position) == (size of string)
the standard says that it returns a reference to an object of type charT
with value charT()
.
const_reference operator[](size_type pos) const;
reference operator[](size_type pos);
Expects: pos <= size().
Returns: *(begin() + pos) if pos < size(). Otherwise, returns a
reference to an object of type charT with value charT(), where
modifying the object to any value other than charT() leads to
undefined behavior.
http://eel.is/c++draft/strings#string.access-1
Unfortunately I couldn't reason about this, it would have been better if it has been Undefined Behavior.
Can somebody explain the rationale behind this?
c++ string c++11 language-lawyer
In case of std::string, if we access an element where (element position) == (size of string)
the standard says that it returns a reference to an object of type charT
with value charT()
.
const_reference operator[](size_type pos) const;
reference operator[](size_type pos);
Expects: pos <= size().
Returns: *(begin() + pos) if pos < size(). Otherwise, returns a
reference to an object of type charT with value charT(), where
modifying the object to any value other than charT() leads to
undefined behavior.
http://eel.is/c++draft/strings#string.access-1
Unfortunately I couldn't reason about this, it would have been better if it has been Undefined Behavior.
Can somebody explain the rationale behind this?
c++ string c++11 language-lawyer
c++ string c++11 language-lawyer
edited Apr 9 at 23:17
Mooing Duck
47.4k1173132
47.4k1173132
asked Apr 9 at 8:18
AImx1AImx1
508319
508319
5
@user463035818 no that's not true. Subscript operator [] does not perform a check.string::at()
does and for that reason it throws
– KostasRim
Apr 9 at 8:30
7
Doesn't violating "Expects:pos <= size()
" lead to UB straight away? The "Otherwise" refers only to thepos == size
case, no?
– Max Langhof
Apr 9 at 8:30
7
exactly I think the crux is "Expects: pos <= size()." if you dont follow the precondition you are in UB land anyhow, so it is just about accesing the "end" of the string
– user463035818
Apr 9 at 8:31
7
@AImx1 Where does the standard say that violating an "Expects" clause is anything other than UB?
– Max Langhof
Apr 9 at 8:31
2
For a C-style string of length X, using the index X will give you the null-terminator.std::string
simply tries to emulate that. Going beyond will always lead to UB.
– Some programmer dude
Apr 9 at 8:32
|
show 11 more comments
5
@user463035818 no that's not true. Subscript operator [] does not perform a check.string::at()
does and for that reason it throws
– KostasRim
Apr 9 at 8:30
7
Doesn't violating "Expects:pos <= size()
" lead to UB straight away? The "Otherwise" refers only to thepos == size
case, no?
– Max Langhof
Apr 9 at 8:30
7
exactly I think the crux is "Expects: pos <= size()." if you dont follow the precondition you are in UB land anyhow, so it is just about accesing the "end" of the string
– user463035818
Apr 9 at 8:31
7
@AImx1 Where does the standard say that violating an "Expects" clause is anything other than UB?
– Max Langhof
Apr 9 at 8:31
2
For a C-style string of length X, using the index X will give you the null-terminator.std::string
simply tries to emulate that. Going beyond will always lead to UB.
– Some programmer dude
Apr 9 at 8:32
5
5
@user463035818 no that's not true. Subscript operator [] does not perform a check.
string::at()
does and for that reason it throws– KostasRim
Apr 9 at 8:30
@user463035818 no that's not true. Subscript operator [] does not perform a check.
string::at()
does and for that reason it throws– KostasRim
Apr 9 at 8:30
7
7
Doesn't violating "Expects:
pos <= size()
" lead to UB straight away? The "Otherwise" refers only to the pos == size
case, no?– Max Langhof
Apr 9 at 8:30
Doesn't violating "Expects:
pos <= size()
" lead to UB straight away? The "Otherwise" refers only to the pos == size
case, no?– Max Langhof
Apr 9 at 8:30
7
7
exactly I think the crux is "Expects: pos <= size()." if you dont follow the precondition you are in UB land anyhow, so it is just about accesing the "end" of the string
– user463035818
Apr 9 at 8:31
exactly I think the crux is "Expects: pos <= size()." if you dont follow the precondition you are in UB land anyhow, so it is just about accesing the "end" of the string
– user463035818
Apr 9 at 8:31
7
7
@AImx1 Where does the standard say that violating an "Expects" clause is anything other than UB?
– Max Langhof
Apr 9 at 8:31
@AImx1 Where does the standard say that violating an "Expects" clause is anything other than UB?
– Max Langhof
Apr 9 at 8:31
2
2
For a C-style string of length X, using the index X will give you the null-terminator.
std::string
simply tries to emulate that. Going beyond will always lead to UB.– Some programmer dude
Apr 9 at 8:32
For a C-style string of length X, using the index X will give you the null-terminator.
std::string
simply tries to emulate that. Going beyond will always lead to UB.– Some programmer dude
Apr 9 at 8:32
|
show 11 more comments
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
You have to consider the full specs.
First of all:
Expects: pos <= size().
If you dont follow the precondition you have undefined behaviour anyhow. Now...
Returns: *(begin() + pos) if pos < size(). Otherwise, returns a
reference to an object of type charT with value charT(), where
modifying the object to any value other than charT() leads to
undefined behavior.
The only (valid) case that "otherwise" refers to is when pos == size()
. And that is probably to emulate c string behaviour that have a some_string[size]
element that can be accessed. Note that charT()
is typically just ''
.
PS: One might think that to implement the specification, operator[]
would have to check if pos == size
. However, if the underlying character array has a charT()
at the end of the string, then you get the described behaviour basically for free. Hence, what seems a little different from "usual" access into an array is actually just that.
Great explanation. Also a great example how explaining unsupported cases (>size) leads to harder to follow specs. 'otherwise' should have read 'if pos==size'
– xtofl
Apr 10 at 5:27
add a comment |
Statement 1 is the precondition for statement 2:
Expects:
pos <= size()
.
Returns:
*(begin() + pos) if pos < size()
.
Otherwise (so here the only viable possibility is
pos == size()
), returns a reference to an object of typecharT
with valuecharT()
(i.e.''
), where modifying the object to any value other thancharT()
leads to undefined behavior.
str[str.size()]
basically points to the null-terminator character. You can read and write it, but you may only write a ''
into it.
add a comment |
The operator expects pos
to be less than or equal to size()
, so if it is not less, then it is expected to be equal.
add a comment |
Additionally to the previous answers please take a look at the libcxx
(the llvm implementation) defines std::string::operator[]
like:
template <class _CharT, class _Traits, class _Allocator>
inline
typename basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::const_reference
basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::operator[](size_type __pos) const _NOEXCEPT
_LIBCPP_ASSERT(__pos <= size(), "string index out of bounds");
return *(data() + __pos);
template <class _CharT, class _Traits, class _Allocator>
inline
typename basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::reference
basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::operator[](size_type __pos) _NOEXCEPT
_LIBCPP_ASSERT(__pos <= size(), "string index out of bounds");
return *(__get_pointer() + __pos);
Take a look at the .at()
that properly throws instead.
template <class _CharT, class _Traits, class _Allocator>
typename basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::const_reference
basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::at(size_type __n) const
if (__n >= size())
this->__throw_out_of_range();
return (*this)[__n];
As you can, in the first case, there is a runtime assert(thanks t.niese for pointing out) which is triggered only in debug mode whereas the second will always throw, regardless of the build options of the library.
3
That's not a static assert it is a runtime assert. A static_assert is something that is check at compile time, and a static assert is done for both release and debug builds.
– t.niese
Apr 9 at 8:52
std::string name = "StackOverflow";
std::cout << name[100];
@t.niese If it a run time assert, why does the below code doesn't crash?
– AImx1
Apr 9 at 8:57
2
@AImx1 cause you didn't specify that you want the debug build when building the library?
– KostasRim
Apr 9 at 9:00
3
@AImx1 because the standard says thatname[100]
is undefined behavior, and not that it must throw._LIBCPP_ASSERT
is a debugging assert that has to be explicitly enabled and is not automatically enable for regular debug builds, and it is run-time dependent llvm: DebugMode
– t.niese
Apr 9 at 9:02
Also, putting aside the_LIBCPP_ASSERT
, what this code snippet really shows is there is no test likeif (__pos >= size()) return _CharT()
, which is what would be needed for the behaviour the original question was expecting. Without a test like this, the only way_CharT()
could be returned is if it is stored in the buffer pointed to bydata()
. Obviously this can't the case for all possible values of__pos
, unless the buffer takes up all the memory on your computer!
– Arthur Tacca
Apr 9 at 14:45
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
StackExchange.snippets.init();
);
);
, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55588104%2faccess-elements-in-stdstring-where-positon-of-string-is-greater-than-its-size%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
You have to consider the full specs.
First of all:
Expects: pos <= size().
If you dont follow the precondition you have undefined behaviour anyhow. Now...
Returns: *(begin() + pos) if pos < size(). Otherwise, returns a
reference to an object of type charT with value charT(), where
modifying the object to any value other than charT() leads to
undefined behavior.
The only (valid) case that "otherwise" refers to is when pos == size()
. And that is probably to emulate c string behaviour that have a some_string[size]
element that can be accessed. Note that charT()
is typically just ''
.
PS: One might think that to implement the specification, operator[]
would have to check if pos == size
. However, if the underlying character array has a charT()
at the end of the string, then you get the described behaviour basically for free. Hence, what seems a little different from "usual" access into an array is actually just that.
Great explanation. Also a great example how explaining unsupported cases (>size) leads to harder to follow specs. 'otherwise' should have read 'if pos==size'
– xtofl
Apr 10 at 5:27
add a comment |
You have to consider the full specs.
First of all:
Expects: pos <= size().
If you dont follow the precondition you have undefined behaviour anyhow. Now...
Returns: *(begin() + pos) if pos < size(). Otherwise, returns a
reference to an object of type charT with value charT(), where
modifying the object to any value other than charT() leads to
undefined behavior.
The only (valid) case that "otherwise" refers to is when pos == size()
. And that is probably to emulate c string behaviour that have a some_string[size]
element that can be accessed. Note that charT()
is typically just ''
.
PS: One might think that to implement the specification, operator[]
would have to check if pos == size
. However, if the underlying character array has a charT()
at the end of the string, then you get the described behaviour basically for free. Hence, what seems a little different from "usual" access into an array is actually just that.
Great explanation. Also a great example how explaining unsupported cases (>size) leads to harder to follow specs. 'otherwise' should have read 'if pos==size'
– xtofl
Apr 10 at 5:27
add a comment |
You have to consider the full specs.
First of all:
Expects: pos <= size().
If you dont follow the precondition you have undefined behaviour anyhow. Now...
Returns: *(begin() + pos) if pos < size(). Otherwise, returns a
reference to an object of type charT with value charT(), where
modifying the object to any value other than charT() leads to
undefined behavior.
The only (valid) case that "otherwise" refers to is when pos == size()
. And that is probably to emulate c string behaviour that have a some_string[size]
element that can be accessed. Note that charT()
is typically just ''
.
PS: One might think that to implement the specification, operator[]
would have to check if pos == size
. However, if the underlying character array has a charT()
at the end of the string, then you get the described behaviour basically for free. Hence, what seems a little different from "usual" access into an array is actually just that.
You have to consider the full specs.
First of all:
Expects: pos <= size().
If you dont follow the precondition you have undefined behaviour anyhow. Now...
Returns: *(begin() + pos) if pos < size(). Otherwise, returns a
reference to an object of type charT with value charT(), where
modifying the object to any value other than charT() leads to
undefined behavior.
The only (valid) case that "otherwise" refers to is when pos == size()
. And that is probably to emulate c string behaviour that have a some_string[size]
element that can be accessed. Note that charT()
is typically just ''
.
PS: One might think that to implement the specification, operator[]
would have to check if pos == size
. However, if the underlying character array has a charT()
at the end of the string, then you get the described behaviour basically for free. Hence, what seems a little different from "usual" access into an array is actually just that.
edited Apr 9 at 8:49
answered Apr 9 at 8:35
user463035818user463035818
19.1k42971
19.1k42971
Great explanation. Also a great example how explaining unsupported cases (>size) leads to harder to follow specs. 'otherwise' should have read 'if pos==size'
– xtofl
Apr 10 at 5:27
add a comment |
Great explanation. Also a great example how explaining unsupported cases (>size) leads to harder to follow specs. 'otherwise' should have read 'if pos==size'
– xtofl
Apr 10 at 5:27
Great explanation. Also a great example how explaining unsupported cases (>size) leads to harder to follow specs. 'otherwise' should have read 'if pos==size'
– xtofl
Apr 10 at 5:27
Great explanation. Also a great example how explaining unsupported cases (>size) leads to harder to follow specs. 'otherwise' should have read 'if pos==size'
– xtofl
Apr 10 at 5:27
add a comment |
Statement 1 is the precondition for statement 2:
Expects:
pos <= size()
.
Returns:
*(begin() + pos) if pos < size()
.
Otherwise (so here the only viable possibility is
pos == size()
), returns a reference to an object of typecharT
with valuecharT()
(i.e.''
), where modifying the object to any value other thancharT()
leads to undefined behavior.
str[str.size()]
basically points to the null-terminator character. You can read and write it, but you may only write a ''
into it.
add a comment |
Statement 1 is the precondition for statement 2:
Expects:
pos <= size()
.
Returns:
*(begin() + pos) if pos < size()
.
Otherwise (so here the only viable possibility is
pos == size()
), returns a reference to an object of typecharT
with valuecharT()
(i.e.''
), where modifying the object to any value other thancharT()
leads to undefined behavior.
str[str.size()]
basically points to the null-terminator character. You can read and write it, but you may only write a ''
into it.
add a comment |
Statement 1 is the precondition for statement 2:
Expects:
pos <= size()
.
Returns:
*(begin() + pos) if pos < size()
.
Otherwise (so here the only viable possibility is
pos == size()
), returns a reference to an object of typecharT
with valuecharT()
(i.e.''
), where modifying the object to any value other thancharT()
leads to undefined behavior.
str[str.size()]
basically points to the null-terminator character. You can read and write it, but you may only write a ''
into it.
Statement 1 is the precondition for statement 2:
Expects:
pos <= size()
.
Returns:
*(begin() + pos) if pos < size()
.
Otherwise (so here the only viable possibility is
pos == size()
), returns a reference to an object of typecharT
with valuecharT()
(i.e.''
), where modifying the object to any value other thancharT()
leads to undefined behavior.
str[str.size()]
basically points to the null-terminator character. You can read and write it, but you may only write a ''
into it.
edited Apr 9 at 23:20
Mooing Duck
47.4k1173132
47.4k1173132
answered Apr 9 at 8:36
rustyxrustyx
33.5k8100144
33.5k8100144
add a comment |
add a comment |
The operator expects pos
to be less than or equal to size()
, so if it is not less, then it is expected to be equal.
add a comment |
The operator expects pos
to be less than or equal to size()
, so if it is not less, then it is expected to be equal.
add a comment |
The operator expects pos
to be less than or equal to size()
, so if it is not less, then it is expected to be equal.
The operator expects pos
to be less than or equal to size()
, so if it is not less, then it is expected to be equal.
edited Apr 9 at 9:33
Raimund Krämer
710425
710425
answered Apr 9 at 8:34
YolaYola
11.5k64774
11.5k64774
add a comment |
add a comment |
Additionally to the previous answers please take a look at the libcxx
(the llvm implementation) defines std::string::operator[]
like:
template <class _CharT, class _Traits, class _Allocator>
inline
typename basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::const_reference
basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::operator[](size_type __pos) const _NOEXCEPT
_LIBCPP_ASSERT(__pos <= size(), "string index out of bounds");
return *(data() + __pos);
template <class _CharT, class _Traits, class _Allocator>
inline
typename basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::reference
basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::operator[](size_type __pos) _NOEXCEPT
_LIBCPP_ASSERT(__pos <= size(), "string index out of bounds");
return *(__get_pointer() + __pos);
Take a look at the .at()
that properly throws instead.
template <class _CharT, class _Traits, class _Allocator>
typename basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::const_reference
basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::at(size_type __n) const
if (__n >= size())
this->__throw_out_of_range();
return (*this)[__n];
As you can, in the first case, there is a runtime assert(thanks t.niese for pointing out) which is triggered only in debug mode whereas the second will always throw, regardless of the build options of the library.
3
That's not a static assert it is a runtime assert. A static_assert is something that is check at compile time, and a static assert is done for both release and debug builds.
– t.niese
Apr 9 at 8:52
std::string name = "StackOverflow";
std::cout << name[100];
@t.niese If it a run time assert, why does the below code doesn't crash?
– AImx1
Apr 9 at 8:57
2
@AImx1 cause you didn't specify that you want the debug build when building the library?
– KostasRim
Apr 9 at 9:00
3
@AImx1 because the standard says thatname[100]
is undefined behavior, and not that it must throw._LIBCPP_ASSERT
is a debugging assert that has to be explicitly enabled and is not automatically enable for regular debug builds, and it is run-time dependent llvm: DebugMode
– t.niese
Apr 9 at 9:02
Also, putting aside the_LIBCPP_ASSERT
, what this code snippet really shows is there is no test likeif (__pos >= size()) return _CharT()
, which is what would be needed for the behaviour the original question was expecting. Without a test like this, the only way_CharT()
could be returned is if it is stored in the buffer pointed to bydata()
. Obviously this can't the case for all possible values of__pos
, unless the buffer takes up all the memory on your computer!
– Arthur Tacca
Apr 9 at 14:45
add a comment |
Additionally to the previous answers please take a look at the libcxx
(the llvm implementation) defines std::string::operator[]
like:
template <class _CharT, class _Traits, class _Allocator>
inline
typename basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::const_reference
basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::operator[](size_type __pos) const _NOEXCEPT
_LIBCPP_ASSERT(__pos <= size(), "string index out of bounds");
return *(data() + __pos);
template <class _CharT, class _Traits, class _Allocator>
inline
typename basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::reference
basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::operator[](size_type __pos) _NOEXCEPT
_LIBCPP_ASSERT(__pos <= size(), "string index out of bounds");
return *(__get_pointer() + __pos);
Take a look at the .at()
that properly throws instead.
template <class _CharT, class _Traits, class _Allocator>
typename basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::const_reference
basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::at(size_type __n) const
if (__n >= size())
this->__throw_out_of_range();
return (*this)[__n];
As you can, in the first case, there is a runtime assert(thanks t.niese for pointing out) which is triggered only in debug mode whereas the second will always throw, regardless of the build options of the library.
3
That's not a static assert it is a runtime assert. A static_assert is something that is check at compile time, and a static assert is done for both release and debug builds.
– t.niese
Apr 9 at 8:52
std::string name = "StackOverflow";
std::cout << name[100];
@t.niese If it a run time assert, why does the below code doesn't crash?
– AImx1
Apr 9 at 8:57
2
@AImx1 cause you didn't specify that you want the debug build when building the library?
– KostasRim
Apr 9 at 9:00
3
@AImx1 because the standard says thatname[100]
is undefined behavior, and not that it must throw._LIBCPP_ASSERT
is a debugging assert that has to be explicitly enabled and is not automatically enable for regular debug builds, and it is run-time dependent llvm: DebugMode
– t.niese
Apr 9 at 9:02
Also, putting aside the_LIBCPP_ASSERT
, what this code snippet really shows is there is no test likeif (__pos >= size()) return _CharT()
, which is what would be needed for the behaviour the original question was expecting. Without a test like this, the only way_CharT()
could be returned is if it is stored in the buffer pointed to bydata()
. Obviously this can't the case for all possible values of__pos
, unless the buffer takes up all the memory on your computer!
– Arthur Tacca
Apr 9 at 14:45
add a comment |
Additionally to the previous answers please take a look at the libcxx
(the llvm implementation) defines std::string::operator[]
like:
template <class _CharT, class _Traits, class _Allocator>
inline
typename basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::const_reference
basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::operator[](size_type __pos) const _NOEXCEPT
_LIBCPP_ASSERT(__pos <= size(), "string index out of bounds");
return *(data() + __pos);
template <class _CharT, class _Traits, class _Allocator>
inline
typename basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::reference
basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::operator[](size_type __pos) _NOEXCEPT
_LIBCPP_ASSERT(__pos <= size(), "string index out of bounds");
return *(__get_pointer() + __pos);
Take a look at the .at()
that properly throws instead.
template <class _CharT, class _Traits, class _Allocator>
typename basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::const_reference
basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::at(size_type __n) const
if (__n >= size())
this->__throw_out_of_range();
return (*this)[__n];
As you can, in the first case, there is a runtime assert(thanks t.niese for pointing out) which is triggered only in debug mode whereas the second will always throw, regardless of the build options of the library.
Additionally to the previous answers please take a look at the libcxx
(the llvm implementation) defines std::string::operator[]
like:
template <class _CharT, class _Traits, class _Allocator>
inline
typename basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::const_reference
basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::operator[](size_type __pos) const _NOEXCEPT
_LIBCPP_ASSERT(__pos <= size(), "string index out of bounds");
return *(data() + __pos);
template <class _CharT, class _Traits, class _Allocator>
inline
typename basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::reference
basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::operator[](size_type __pos) _NOEXCEPT
_LIBCPP_ASSERT(__pos <= size(), "string index out of bounds");
return *(__get_pointer() + __pos);
Take a look at the .at()
that properly throws instead.
template <class _CharT, class _Traits, class _Allocator>
typename basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::const_reference
basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Allocator>::at(size_type __n) const
if (__n >= size())
this->__throw_out_of_range();
return (*this)[__n];
As you can, in the first case, there is a runtime assert(thanks t.niese for pointing out) which is triggered only in debug mode whereas the second will always throw, regardless of the build options of the library.
edited Apr 9 at 8:55
answered Apr 9 at 8:47
KostasRimKostasRim
1,5821926
1,5821926
3
That's not a static assert it is a runtime assert. A static_assert is something that is check at compile time, and a static assert is done for both release and debug builds.
– t.niese
Apr 9 at 8:52
std::string name = "StackOverflow";
std::cout << name[100];
@t.niese If it a run time assert, why does the below code doesn't crash?
– AImx1
Apr 9 at 8:57
2
@AImx1 cause you didn't specify that you want the debug build when building the library?
– KostasRim
Apr 9 at 9:00
3
@AImx1 because the standard says thatname[100]
is undefined behavior, and not that it must throw._LIBCPP_ASSERT
is a debugging assert that has to be explicitly enabled and is not automatically enable for regular debug builds, and it is run-time dependent llvm: DebugMode
– t.niese
Apr 9 at 9:02
Also, putting aside the_LIBCPP_ASSERT
, what this code snippet really shows is there is no test likeif (__pos >= size()) return _CharT()
, which is what would be needed for the behaviour the original question was expecting. Without a test like this, the only way_CharT()
could be returned is if it is stored in the buffer pointed to bydata()
. Obviously this can't the case for all possible values of__pos
, unless the buffer takes up all the memory on your computer!
– Arthur Tacca
Apr 9 at 14:45
add a comment |
3
That's not a static assert it is a runtime assert. A static_assert is something that is check at compile time, and a static assert is done for both release and debug builds.
– t.niese
Apr 9 at 8:52
std::string name = "StackOverflow";
std::cout << name[100];
@t.niese If it a run time assert, why does the below code doesn't crash?
– AImx1
Apr 9 at 8:57
2
@AImx1 cause you didn't specify that you want the debug build when building the library?
– KostasRim
Apr 9 at 9:00
3
@AImx1 because the standard says thatname[100]
is undefined behavior, and not that it must throw._LIBCPP_ASSERT
is a debugging assert that has to be explicitly enabled and is not automatically enable for regular debug builds, and it is run-time dependent llvm: DebugMode
– t.niese
Apr 9 at 9:02
Also, putting aside the_LIBCPP_ASSERT
, what this code snippet really shows is there is no test likeif (__pos >= size()) return _CharT()
, which is what would be needed for the behaviour the original question was expecting. Without a test like this, the only way_CharT()
could be returned is if it is stored in the buffer pointed to bydata()
. Obviously this can't the case for all possible values of__pos
, unless the buffer takes up all the memory on your computer!
– Arthur Tacca
Apr 9 at 14:45
3
3
That's not a static assert it is a runtime assert. A static_assert is something that is check at compile time, and a static assert is done for both release and debug builds.
– t.niese
Apr 9 at 8:52
That's not a static assert it is a runtime assert. A static_assert is something that is check at compile time, and a static assert is done for both release and debug builds.
– t.niese
Apr 9 at 8:52
std::string name = "StackOverflow";
std::cout << name[100];
@t.niese If it a run time assert, why does the below code doesn't crash?– AImx1
Apr 9 at 8:57
std::string name = "StackOverflow";
std::cout << name[100];
@t.niese If it a run time assert, why does the below code doesn't crash?– AImx1
Apr 9 at 8:57
2
2
@AImx1 cause you didn't specify that you want the debug build when building the library?
– KostasRim
Apr 9 at 9:00
@AImx1 cause you didn't specify that you want the debug build when building the library?
– KostasRim
Apr 9 at 9:00
3
3
@AImx1 because the standard says that
name[100]
is undefined behavior, and not that it must throw. _LIBCPP_ASSERT
is a debugging assert that has to be explicitly enabled and is not automatically enable for regular debug builds, and it is run-time dependent llvm: DebugMode– t.niese
Apr 9 at 9:02
@AImx1 because the standard says that
name[100]
is undefined behavior, and not that it must throw. _LIBCPP_ASSERT
is a debugging assert that has to be explicitly enabled and is not automatically enable for regular debug builds, and it is run-time dependent llvm: DebugMode– t.niese
Apr 9 at 9:02
Also, putting aside the
_LIBCPP_ASSERT
, what this code snippet really shows is there is no test like if (__pos >= size()) return _CharT()
, which is what would be needed for the behaviour the original question was expecting. Without a test like this, the only way _CharT()
could be returned is if it is stored in the buffer pointed to by data()
. Obviously this can't the case for all possible values of __pos
, unless the buffer takes up all the memory on your computer!– Arthur Tacca
Apr 9 at 14:45
Also, putting aside the
_LIBCPP_ASSERT
, what this code snippet really shows is there is no test like if (__pos >= size()) return _CharT()
, which is what would be needed for the behaviour the original question was expecting. Without a test like this, the only way _CharT()
could be returned is if it is stored in the buffer pointed to by data()
. Obviously this can't the case for all possible values of __pos
, unless the buffer takes up all the memory on your computer!– Arthur Tacca
Apr 9 at 14:45
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55588104%2faccess-elements-in-stdstring-where-positon-of-string-is-greater-than-its-size%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
5
@user463035818 no that's not true. Subscript operator [] does not perform a check.
string::at()
does and for that reason it throws– KostasRim
Apr 9 at 8:30
7
Doesn't violating "Expects:
pos <= size()
" lead to UB straight away? The "Otherwise" refers only to thepos == size
case, no?– Max Langhof
Apr 9 at 8:30
7
exactly I think the crux is "Expects: pos <= size()." if you dont follow the precondition you are in UB land anyhow, so it is just about accesing the "end" of the string
– user463035818
Apr 9 at 8:31
7
@AImx1 Where does the standard say that violating an "Expects" clause is anything other than UB?
– Max Langhof
Apr 9 at 8:31
2
For a C-style string of length X, using the index X will give you the null-terminator.
std::string
simply tries to emulate that. Going beyond will always lead to UB.– Some programmer dude
Apr 9 at 8:32