1 <chapter xmlns="http://docbook.org/ns/docbook" version="5.0" 2 xml:id="std.strings" xreflabel="Strings"> 3 <?dbhtml filename="strings.html"?> 4 5 <info><title> 6 Strings 7 <indexterm><primary>Strings</primary></indexterm> 8 </title> 9 <keywordset> 10 <keyword>ISO C++</keyword> 11 <keyword>library</keyword> 12 </keywordset> 13 </info> 14 15 <!-- Sect1 01 : Character Traits --> 16 17 <!-- Sect1 02 : String Classes --> 18 <section xml:id="std.strings.string" xreflabel="string"><info><title>String Classes</title></info> 19 20 21 <section xml:id="strings.string.simple" xreflabel="Simple Transformations"><info><title>Simple Transformations</title></info> 22 23 <para> 24 Here are Standard, simple, and portable ways to perform common 25 transformations on a <code>string</code> instance, such as 26 "convert to all upper case." The word transformations 27 is especially apt, because the standard template function 28 <code>transform<></code> is used. 29 </para> 30 <para> 31 This code will go through some iterations. Here's a simple 32 version: 33 </para> 34 <programlisting> 35 #include <string> 36 #include <algorithm> 37 #include <cctype> // old <ctype.h> 38 39 struct ToLower 40 { 41 char operator() (char c) const { return std::tolower(c); } 42 }; 43 44 struct ToUpper 45 { 46 char operator() (char c) const { return std::toupper(c); } 47 }; 48 49 int main() 50 { 51 std::string s ("Some Kind Of Initial Input Goes Here"); 52 53 // Change everything into upper case 54 std::transform (s.begin(), s.end(), s.begin(), ToUpper()); 55 56 // Change everything into lower case 57 std::transform (s.begin(), s.end(), s.begin(), ToLower()); 58 59 // Change everything back into upper case, but store the 60 // result in a different string 61 std::string capital_s; 62 capital_s.resize(s.size()); 63 std::transform (s.begin(), s.end(), capital_s.begin(), ToUpper()); 64 } 65 </programlisting> 66 <para> 67 <emphasis>Note</emphasis> that these calls all 68 involve the global C locale through the use of the C functions 69 <code>toupper/tolower</code>. This is absolutely guaranteed to work -- 70 but <emphasis>only</emphasis> if the string contains <emphasis>only</emphasis> characters 71 from the basic source character set, and there are <emphasis>only</emphasis> 72 96 of those. Which means that not even all English text can be 73 represented (certain British spellings, proper names, and so forth). 74 So, if all your input forevermore consists of only those 96 75 characters (hahahahahaha), then you're done. 76 </para> 77 <para><emphasis>Note</emphasis> that the 78 <code>ToUpper</code> and <code>ToLower</code> function objects 79 are needed because <code>toupper</code> and <code>tolower</code> 80 are overloaded names (declared in <code><cctype></code> and 81 <code><locale></code>) so the template-arguments for 82 <code>transform<></code> cannot be deduced, as explained in 83 <link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2002-11/msg00180.html">this 84 message</link>. 85 <!-- section 14.8.2.4 clause 16 in ISO 14882:1998 --> 86 At minimum, you can write short wrappers like 87 </para> 88 <programlisting> 89 char toLower (char c) 90 { 91 // std::tolower(c) is undefined if c < 0 so cast to unsigned char. 92 return std::tolower((unsigned char)c); 93 } </programlisting> 94 <para>(Thanks to James Kanze for assistance and suggestions on all of this.) 95 </para> 96 <para>Another common operation is trimming off excess whitespace. Much 97 like transformations, this task is trivial with the use of string's 98 <code>find</code> family. These examples are broken into multiple 99 statements for readability: 100 </para> 101 <programlisting> 102 std::string str (" \t blah blah blah \n "); 103 104 // trim leading whitespace 105 string::size_type notwhite = str.find_first_not_of(" \t\n"); 106 str.erase(0,notwhite); 107 108 // trim trailing whitespace 109 notwhite = str.find_last_not_of(" \t\n"); 110 str.erase(notwhite+1); </programlisting> 111 <para>Obviously, the calls to <code>find</code> could be inserted directly 112 into the calls to <code>erase</code>, in case your compiler does not 113 optimize named temporaries out of existence. 114 </para> 115 116 </section> 117 <section xml:id="strings.string.case" xreflabel="Case Sensitivity"><info><title>Case Sensitivity</title></info> 118 119 <para> 120 </para> 121 122 <para>The well-known-and-if-it-isn't-well-known-it-ought-to-be 123 <link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://www.gotw.ca/gotw/">Guru of the Week</link> 124 discussions held on Usenet covered this topic in January of 1998. 125 Briefly, the challenge was, <quote>write a 'ci_string' class which 126 is identical to the standard 'string' class, but is 127 case-insensitive in the same way as the (common but nonstandard) 128 C function stricmp()</quote>. 129 </para> 130 <programlisting> 131 ci_string s( "AbCdE" ); 132 133 // case insensitive 134 assert( s == "abcde" ); 135 assert( s == "ABCDE" ); 136 137 // still case-preserving, of course 138 assert( strcmp( s.c_str(), "AbCdE" ) == 0 ); 139 assert( strcmp( s.c_str(), "abcde" ) != 0 ); </programlisting> 140 141 <para>The solution is surprisingly easy. The original answer was 142 posted on Usenet, and a revised version appears in Herb Sutter's 143 book <emphasis>Exceptional C++</emphasis> and on his website as <link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://www.gotw.ca/gotw/029.htm">GotW 29</link>. 144 </para> 145 <para>See? Told you it was easy!</para> 146 <para> 147 <emphasis>Added June 2000:</emphasis> The May 2000 issue of C++ 148 Report contains a fascinating <link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://lafstern.org/matt/col2_new.pdf"> article</link> by 149 Matt Austern (yes, <emphasis>the</emphasis> Matt Austern) on why 150 case-insensitive comparisons are not as easy as they seem, and 151 why creating a class is the <emphasis>wrong</emphasis> way to go 152 about it in production code. (The GotW answer mentions one of 153 the principle difficulties; his article mentions more.) 154 </para> 155 <para>Basically, this is "easy" only if you ignore some things, 156 things which may be too important to your program to ignore. (I chose 157 to ignore them when originally writing this entry, and am surprised 158 that nobody ever called me on it...) The GotW question and answer 159 remain useful instructional tools, however. 160 </para> 161 <para><emphasis>Added September 2000:</emphasis> James Kanze provided a link to a 162 <link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr21/tr21-5.html">Unicode 163 Technical Report discussing case handling</link>, which provides some 164 very good information. 165 </para> 166 167 </section> 168 <section xml:id="strings.string.character_types" xreflabel="Arbitrary Characters"><info><title>Arbitrary Character Types</title></info> 169 170 <para> 171 </para> 172 173 <para>The <code>std::basic_string</code> is tantalizingly general, in that 174 it is parameterized on the type of the characters which it holds. 175 In theory, you could whip up a Unicode character class and instantiate 176 <code>std::basic_string<my_unicode_char></code>, or assuming 177 that integers are wider than characters on your platform, maybe just 178 declare variables of type <code>std::basic_string<int></code>. 179 </para> 180 <para>That's the theory. Remember however that basic_string has additional 181 type parameters, which take default arguments based on the character 182 type (called <code>CharT</code> here): 183 </para> 184 <programlisting> 185 template <typename CharT, 186 typename Traits = char_traits<CharT>, 187 typename Alloc = allocator<CharT> > 188 class basic_string { .... };</programlisting> 189 <para>Now, <code>allocator<CharT></code> will probably Do The Right 190 Thing by default, unless you need to implement your own allocator 191 for your characters. 192 </para> 193 <para>But <code>char_traits</code> takes more work. The char_traits 194 template is <emphasis>declared</emphasis> but not <emphasis>defined</emphasis>. 195 That means there is only 196 </para> 197 <programlisting> 198 template <typename CharT> 199 struct char_traits 200 { 201 static void foo (type1 x, type2 y); 202 ... 203 };</programlisting> 204 <para>and functions such as char_traits<CharT>::foo() are not 205 actually defined anywhere for the general case. The C++ standard 206 permits this, because writing such a definition to fit all possible 207 CharT's cannot be done. 208 </para> 209 <para>The C++ standard also requires that char_traits be specialized for 210 instantiations of <code>char</code> and <code>wchar_t</code>, and it 211 is these template specializations that permit entities like 212 <code>basic_string<char,char_traits<char>></code> to work. 213 </para> 214 <para>If you want to use character types other than char and wchar_t, 215 such as <code>unsigned char</code> and <code>int</code>, you will 216 need suitable specializations for them. For a time, in earlier 217 versions of GCC, there was a mostly-correct implementation that 218 let programmers be lazy but it broke under many situations, so it 219 was removed. GCC 3.4 introduced a new implementation that mostly 220 works and can be specialized even for <code>int</code> and other 221 built-in types. 222 </para> 223 <para>If you want to use your own special character class, then you have 224 <link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2002-08/msg00163.html">a lot 225 of work to do</link>, especially if you with to use i18n features 226 (facets require traits information but don't have a traits argument). 227 </para> 228 <para>Another example of how to specialize char_traits was given <link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2002-08/msg00260.html">on the 229 mailing list</link> and at a later date was put into the file <code> 230 include/ext/pod_char_traits.h</code>. We agree 231 that the way it's used with basic_string (scroll down to main()) 232 doesn't look nice, but that's because <link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2002-08/msg00236.html">the 233 nice-looking first attempt</link> turned out to <link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2002-08/msg00242.html">not 234 be conforming C++</link>, due to the rule that CharT must be a POD. 235 (See how tricky this is?) 236 </para> 237 238 </section> 239 240 <section xml:id="strings.string.token" xreflabel="Tokenizing"><info><title>Tokenizing</title></info> 241 242 <para> 243 </para> 244 <para>The Standard C (and C++) function <code>strtok()</code> leaves a lot to 245 be desired in terms of user-friendliness. It's unintuitive, it 246 destroys the character string on which it operates, and it requires 247 you to handle all the memory problems. But it does let the client 248 code decide what to use to break the string into pieces; it allows 249 you to choose the "whitespace," so to speak. 250 </para> 251 <para>A C++ implementation lets us keep the good things and fix those 252 annoyances. The implementation here is more intuitive (you only 253 call it once, not in a loop with varying argument), it does not 254 affect the original string at all, and all the memory allocation 255 is handled for you. 256 </para> 257 <para>It's called stringtok, and it's a template function. Sources are 258 as below, in a less-portable form than it could be, to keep this 259 example simple (for example, see the comments on what kind of 260 string it will accept). 261 </para> 262 263 <programlisting> 264 #include <string> 265 template <typename Container> 266 void 267 stringtok(Container &container, string const &in, 268 const char * const delimiters = " \t\n") 269 { 270 const string::size_type len = in.length(); 271 string::size_type i = 0; 272 273 while (i < len) 274 { 275 // Eat leading whitespace 276 i = in.find_first_not_of(delimiters, i); 277 if (i == string::npos) 278 return; // Nothing left but white space 279 280 // Find the end of the token 281 string::size_type j = in.find_first_of(delimiters, i); 282 283 // Push token 284 if (j == string::npos) 285 { 286 container.push_back(in.substr(i)); 287 return; 288 } 289 else 290 container.push_back(in.substr(i, j-i)); 291 292 // Set up for next loop 293 i = j + 1; 294 } 295 } 296 </programlisting> 297 298 299 <para> 300 The author uses a more general (but less readable) form of it for 301 parsing command strings and the like. If you compiled and ran this 302 code using it: 303 </para> 304 305 306 <programlisting> 307 std::list<string> ls; 308 stringtok (ls, " this \t is\t\n a test "); 309 for (std::list<string>const_iterator i = ls.begin(); 310 i != ls.end(); ++i) 311 { 312 std::cerr << ':' << (*i) << ":\n"; 313 } </programlisting> 314 <para>You would see this as output: 315 </para> 316 <programlisting> 317 :this: 318 :is: 319 :a: 320 :test: </programlisting> 321 <para>with all the whitespace removed. The original <code>s</code> is still 322 available for use, <code>ls</code> will clean up after itself, and 323 <code>ls.size()</code> will return how many tokens there were. 324 </para> 325 <para>As always, there is a price paid here, in that stringtok is not 326 as fast as strtok. The other benefits usually outweigh that, however. 327 </para> 328 329 <para><emphasis>Added February 2001:</emphasis> Mark Wilden pointed out that the 330 standard <code>std::getline()</code> function can be used with standard 331 <code>istringstreams</code> to perform 332 tokenizing as well. Build an istringstream from the input text, 333 and then use std::getline with varying delimiters (the three-argument 334 signature) to extract tokens into a string. 335 </para> 336 337 338 </section> 339 <section xml:id="strings.string.shrink" xreflabel="Shrink to Fit"><info><title>Shrink to Fit</title></info> 340 341 <para> 342 </para> 343 <para>From GCC 3.4 calling <code>s.reserve(res)</code> on a 344 <code>string s</code> with <code>res < s.capacity()</code> will 345 reduce the string's capacity to <code>std::max(s.size(), res)</code>. 346 </para> 347 <para>This behaviour is suggested, but not required by the standard. Prior 348 to GCC 3.4 the following alternative can be used instead 349 </para> 350 <programlisting> 351 std::string(str.data(), str.size()).swap(str); 352 </programlisting> 353 <para>This is similar to the idiom for reducing 354 a <code>vector</code>'s memory usage 355 (see <link linkend="faq.size_equals_capacity">this FAQ 356 entry</link>) but the regular copy constructor cannot be used 357 because libstdc++'s <code>string</code> is Copy-On-Write in GCC 3. 358 </para> 359 <para>From GCC 4.5 in <link linkend="status.iso.2011">C++11</link> mode you 360 can call <code>s.shrink_to_fit()</code> to achieve the same effect as 361 <code>s.reserve(s.size())</code>. 362 </para> 363 364 365 </section> 366 367 <section xml:id="strings.string.Cstring" xreflabel="CString (MFC)"><info><title>CString (MFC)</title></info> 368 369 <para> 370 </para> 371 372 <para>A common lament seen in various newsgroups deals with the Standard 373 string class as opposed to the Microsoft Foundation Class called 374 CString. Often programmers realize that a standard portable 375 answer is better than a proprietary nonportable one, but in porting 376 their application from a Win32 platform, they discover that they 377 are relying on special functions offered by the CString class. 378 </para> 379 <para>Things are not as bad as they seem. In 380 <link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/1999-04n/msg00236.html">this 381 message</link>, Joe Buck points out a few very important things: 382 </para> 383 <itemizedlist> 384 <listitem><para>The Standard <code>string</code> supports all the operations 385 that CString does, with three exceptions. 386 </para></listitem> 387 <listitem><para>Two of those exceptions (whitespace trimming and case 388 conversion) are trivial to implement. In fact, we do so 389 on this page. 390 </para></listitem> 391 <listitem><para>The third is <code>CString::Format</code>, which allows formatting 392 in the style of <code>sprintf</code>. This deserves some mention: 393 </para></listitem> 394 </itemizedlist> 395 <para> 396 The old libg++ library had a function called form(), which did much 397 the same thing. But for a Standard solution, you should use the 398 stringstream classes. These are the bridge between the iostream 399 hierarchy and the string class, and they operate with regular 400 streams seamlessly because they inherit from the iostream 401 hierarchy. An quick example: 402 </para> 403 <programlisting> 404 #include <iostream> 405 #include <string> 406 #include <sstream> 407 408 string f (string& incoming) // incoming is "foo N" 409 { 410 istringstream incoming_stream(incoming); 411 string the_word; 412 int the_number; 413 414 incoming_stream >> the_word // extract "foo" 415 >> the_number; // extract N 416 417 ostringstream output_stream; 418 output_stream << "The word was " << the_word 419 << " and 3*N was " << (3*the_number); 420 421 return output_stream.str(); 422 } </programlisting> 423 <para>A serious problem with CString is a design bug in its memory 424 allocation. Specifically, quoting from that same message: 425 </para> 426 <programlisting> 427 CString suffers from a common programming error that results in 428 poor performance. Consider the following code: 429 430 CString n_copies_of (const CString& foo, unsigned n) 431 { 432 CString tmp; 433 for (unsigned i = 0; i < n; i++) 434 tmp += foo; 435 return tmp; 436 } 437 438 This function is O(n^2), not O(n). The reason is that each += 439 causes a reallocation and copy of the existing string. Microsoft 440 applications are full of this kind of thing (quadratic performance 441 on tasks that can be done in linear time) -- on the other hand, 442 we should be thankful, as it's created such a big market for high-end 443 ix86 hardware. :-) 444 445 If you replace CString with string in the above function, the 446 performance is O(n). 447 </programlisting> 448 <para>Joe Buck also pointed out some other things to keep in mind when 449 comparing CString and the Standard string class: 450 </para> 451 <itemizedlist> 452 <listitem><para>CString permits access to its internal representation; coders 453 who exploited that may have problems moving to <code>string</code>. 454 </para></listitem> 455 <listitem><para>Microsoft ships the source to CString (in the files 456 MFC\SRC\Str{core,ex}.cpp), so you could fix the allocation 457 bug and rebuild your MFC libraries. 458 <emphasis><emphasis>Note:</emphasis> It looks like the CString shipped 459 with VC++6.0 has fixed this, although it may in fact have been 460 one of the VC++ SPs that did it.</emphasis> 461 </para></listitem> 462 <listitem><para><code>string</code> operations like this have O(n) complexity 463 <emphasis>if the implementors do it correctly</emphasis>. The libstdc++ 464 implementors did it correctly. Other vendors might not. 465 </para></listitem> 466 <listitem><para>While parts of the SGI STL are used in libstdc++, their 467 string class is not. The SGI <code>string</code> is essentially 468 <code>vector<char></code> and does not do any reference 469 counting like libstdc++'s does. (It is O(n), though.) 470 So if you're thinking about SGI's string or rope classes, 471 you're now looking at four possibilities: CString, the 472 libstdc++ string, the SGI string, and the SGI rope, and this 473 is all before any allocator or traits customizations! (More 474 choices than you can shake a stick at -- want fries with that?) 475 </para></listitem> 476 </itemizedlist> 477 478 </section> 479 </section> 480 481 <!-- Sect1 03 : Interacting with C --> 482 483 </chapter> 484
Indexes created Sun May 03 00:22:47 UTC 2026