What is the rationale behind the implicit and forced NUL termination
of strings that are in the process of being constructed in the string_builder?
Where do we depend on this?
Is it a byte-0 or is it a wchar-0 ?
Is this solely to be able to pass non-finished string builder strings to
UNIX system calls?
Why not add the zero byte only when the shared string is finalised?
I ask, obviously, because the code is literally *littered* with these
NUL termination assignments, which, if they could be avoided would clear
up a lot of superfluous cruft.
--
Stephen.
