On 10/21/12 19:08, Martin Sebor wrote:
> There's no requirement that embedded NULs must be preserved
> (that's just how it happens to be implemented). I find it best
> to avoid relying on the knowledge of implementation details
> when exercising the library so that tests don't start failing
> after a conforming optimization or some such tweak is added
> to the code.

That's right. I'll improve it.

Thanks for the review.

Liviu