User forums > General (but related to Code::Blocks)
wxWidgets 3.1.5
oBFusCATed:
--- Quote from: gd_on on March 14, 2021, 10:51:48 am ---Why do you say wxEmptyString should be avoided ?
--- End quote ---
Because it is more expensive probably.
I'm seeing lots of commits in wx where they are removing wxT and they are replacing wxEmptyString with wxString().
sodev:
wxEmptyString is just a wxChar*, this might lead to some surprises in certain situations, but otherwise it might be a bit faster than wxString().
oBFusCATed:
sodev: Why faster? wxString() is the fastest possible way to initialize an empty string. The wxString(wxChar *) is something that should work for actual strings.
gd_on:
Is speed a real problem in that case ?
And in the official documentation :
--- Code: ---wxString wxEmptyString
The global wxString instance of an empty string.
Used extensively in the entire wxWidgets API.
--- End code ---
I have also seen that a few guys had problem with this wxEmptyString, but the doc seem to say it's good and used extensively. It's also said it's a wxString but effectively seen as a wxChar* inside C::B (which use it more than 600 times in it's workspace :-[). so ?? not so bad !
sodev:
oBFusCATed: It is (only?) faster in situations where no temporary wxString object gets created. Right now only comparision against wxEmptyString that use a wxChar* overload comes into my mind. Maybe also method parameter initialization benefits, depends if direct initialization of a wxString from a wxChar* is faster than copy/move-initialization from a temporary wxString.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version