Yes - a NULL BSTR is the same as an empty one. I remember we had all sorts of bugs that were uncovered when we switched from VS6 to 2003 - the CComBSTR class had a change to the default constructor that allocated it using NULL rather than an empty string. This happens when you for example treat a BSTR as a regular C style string and pass it to some function like strlen
, or try to initialise a std::string
with it.
Eric Lippert discusses BSTR's in great detail in Eric's Complete Guide To BSTR Semantics:
Let me list the differences first and
then discuss each point in
excruciating detail.
1) A BSTR must have identical
semantics for NULL and for "". A PWSZ
frequently has different semantics for
those.
2) A BSTR must be allocated and freed
with the SysAlloc* family of
functions. A PWSZ can be an
automatic-storage buffer from the
stack or allocated with malloc, new,
LocalAlloc or any other memory
allocator.
3) A BSTR is of fixed length. A PWSZ
may be of any length, limited only by
the amount of valid memory in its
buffer.
4) A BSTR always points to the first
valid character in the buffer. A PWSZ
may be a pointer to the middle or end
of a string buffer.
5) When allocating an n-byte BSTR you
have room for n/2 wide characters.
When you allocate n bytes for a PWSZ
you can store n / 2 - 1 characters --
you have to leave room for the null.
6) A BSTR may contain any Unicode data
including the zero character. A PWSZ
never contains the zero character
except as an end-of-string marker.
Both a BSTR and a PWSZ always have a
zero character after their last valid
character, but in a BSTR a valid
character may be a zero character.
7) A BSTR may actually contain an odd
number of bytes -- it may be used for
moving binary data around. A PWSZ is
almost always an even number of bytes
and used only for storing Unicode
strings.