From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,874f90f0816ffe3b
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: stt@houdini.camb.inmet.com (Tucker Taft)
Subject: Re: Most efficient way to check for null string?
Date: 1997/06/20
Message-ID: <EC3C0x.E68.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 251413638
Sender: news@inmet.camb.inmet.com (USENET news)
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: houdini.camb.inmet.com
References: <5oe038$2d0$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>
Organization: Intermetrics, Inc.
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-06-20T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Dale Stanbrough (dale@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU) wrote:

: I think the following are both equally readable, so which is likely 
: to be more efficient?

: 	if Str = "" then
: 	
: 	if Str'Length = 0 then

As usual, it depends on the implemenation.  I suspect the second will
be the more efficient on most compilers.  If you really want to
shave cycles, the following will likely be the most efficient:

     if Str'Last < Str'First then ...


: Dale

-Tucker Taft   stt@inmet.com   http://www.inmet.com/~stt/
Intermetrics, Inc.  Burlington, MA  USA