4 ms·

It's not about initialization, it's more about specifying clearly what happens in all cases. Anyway the reason for which it would no pass review is that today

• pritambaral 10y ago
  > the reason for which it would no pass review is that today you use one compiler, tomorrow you have to use another Good thing then that it's mandated by the language reference, and not up to the compiler to decide. According to C++11, §21.4.2/1, an uninitialized std::string should be an object of class std::basic_string with non-null data and a size of 0.
• bn-usd-mistake 10y ago
  It is specified clearly though. The behavior is not compiler dependent, it's specified in the C++ Language standard. See http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/default_initialization http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/default_initializa... and http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/string/string/string/ http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/string/string/string/ If a different compiler breaks this behavior, it's not standard compliant and thus could do all sorts of stuff in every possible line, including in: std::string pad = "";
  • GoToRO 10y ago
    Standards change. Don't they?
    • consz 10y ago
      Do you think that's any more likely than the constructor of std::string changing?
    • knorker 10y ago
      So how can you use operator= or copy constructor of string? The '= ""' won't help you.
• knorker 10y ago
  Sure, I would have preferred a non-branching: std::string pad = descriptive_name_here(path); with the added bonus of being able to add "const" to that, for the benefit of the reader. This is not relying on compiler implementation! Can you name one language that has strings that initialise to anything but a valid object containing an empty string? This is not an obscure side-effect. This is like assuming "std::vector<int> v;" creates an empty vector, not a undefined-state vector container. (I don't want someone coding C++ as if all objects are references. Coding in one language as if it were another is a well-known antipattern)
  • rbadaro 10y ago
    In Java the default value for a String (or any object) is null, not an empty string.
    • knorker 10y ago
      Did you not read my whole comment? Please read the whole thing before replying.
      • rbadaro 10y ago
        Read the whole comment. Still don't see nothing that invalidates my answer to "Can you name one language that has strings that initialise to anything but a valid object containing an empty string?".
        • knorker 10y ago
          You specifically mentioned Java, and I specifically mentioned reference-based languages, with Java being the most obvious example.
• knorker 10y ago
  Looks like I can't edit, so I'll create another comment. I ran into this article that puts quite nicely why the problem isn't the "else", but the "if" itself: https://medium.com/@bartobri/applying-the-linus-tarvolds-good-taste-coding-requirement-99749f37684a#.pji8wp94m https://medium.com/@bartobri/applying-the-linus-tarvolds-goo... This is what I meant in the other comment by preferring the non-branching.