pw_string/docs.rst

.. _module-pw_string:

---------
pw_string
---------
String manipulation is a very common operation, but the standard C and C++
string libraries have drawbacks. The C++ functions are easy-to-use and powerful,
but require too much flash and memory for many embedded projects. The C string
functions are lighter weight, but can be difficult to use correctly. Mishandling
of null terminators or buffer sizes can result in serious bugs.

The ``pw_string`` module provides the flexibility, ease-of-use, and safety of
C++-style string manipulation, but with no dynamic memory allocation and a much
smaller binary size impact. Using ``pw_string`` in place of the standard C
functions eliminates issues related to buffer overflow or missing null
terminators.

Compatibility
=============
C++17

Dependencies
============
* ``pw_preprocessor``
* ``pw_status``
* ``pw_span``

Features
========

pw::string::Format
------------------
The ``pw::string::Format`` and ``pw::string::FormatVaList`` functions provide
safer alternatives to ``std::snprintf`` and ``std::vsnprintf``. The snprintf
return value is awkward to interpret, and misinterpreting it can lead to serious
bugs.

Size report: replacing snprintf with pw::string::Format
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The ``Format`` functions have a small, fixed code size cost. However, relative
to equivalent ``std::snprintf`` calls, there is no incremental code size cost to
using ``Format``.

.. include:: format_size_report

pw::StringBuilder
-----------------
StringBuilder facilitates building formatted strings in a fixed-size buffer. It
is designed to give the flexibility of ``std::string`` and
``std::ostringstream``, but with a small footprint. However, applications
sensitive to code size should use StringBuilder with care.

Size report: replacing snprintf with pw::StringBuilder
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The fixed code size cost of StringBuilder is significant, though smaller than
``std::snprintf``. Using StringBuilder's << and append methods exclusively in
place of ``snprintf`` reduces code size, but ``snprintf`` may be difficult to
avoid.

The incremental code size cost of StringBuilder is comparable to ``snprintf`` if
errors are handled. Each argument to StringBuilder's << expands to a function
call, but one or two StringBuilder appends may have a smaller code size impact
than a single ``snprintf`` call.

.. include:: string_builder_size_report

Future work
^^^^^^^^^^^
* StringBuilder's fixed size cost can be dramatically reduced by limiting
  support for 64-bit integers.
* Consider integrating with the tokenizer module.