Thanks for that link, glad this feature is implemented on some level. I
believe `s.c_str()` would have better ergonomics (9 vs 28 characters) than
`std::define_static_string(s)` which is a free function for any range of
`char`. Since that proposal is already accepted, my proposal becomes adding
this to class string_view:

consteval const char* c_str() const { return define_static_string(*this); }

This has the side benefit of making it easier to do an automated refactor
of `const char*` to `constexpr std::string_view`, since I only have to add
`.c_str()` on the end of the variable name rather than wrapping
it in a free function.

On Thu, Jul 3, 2025 at 9:30 PM Desmond Gold via Std-Proposals <
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> What about `std::define_static_string` in wg21.link/p3491? It's already
> in C++26
>
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2025 at 8:31 AM JJ Marr via Std-Proposals <
> std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> I want to convert over a large codebase away from C-style strings. One of
>> the sticking points is compile-time string constants.
>>
>> Modern C++ practice is to use `constexpr std::string_view`. However, I
>> cannot easily use that string_view in an interface that accepts
>> null-terminated C-style strings. This makes it difficult to do an
>> incremental migration.
>>
>> I currently have two options:
>>
>> 1. I can manually add a null-terminator if I want to pass a string_view
>> into a function expecting C-style strings. This is confusing and violates
>> the intended usage of string_view.
>>
>> 2. I can create my own wrapper of std::string_view that guarantees
>> null-termination. However, this isn't idiomatic and project-specific.
>>
>> Instead, I propose to add a `consteval c_str()` function that constructs
>> a C-string from a string_view at compile-time. This wouldn't be a good idea
>> at runtime (so it can't be `constexpr`) because it would trigger a memory
>> allocation on an object that's supposed to be a non-owning reference.
>> However, I don't see any issues with this at compile-time, since the
>> compiler can figure out what the string_view should look like.
>>
>> What does std-proposals think? Should I write an actual draft?
>> --
>> Std-Proposals mailing list
>> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
>> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>>
> --
> Std-Proposals mailing list
> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>