使用/不使用ios :: binary模式打开流时使用读/写的区别 [英] Difference in using read/write when stream is opened with/without ios::binary mode

问题描述

在我使用下面的代码片段的实验中，我没有发现任何特殊的区别，无论我创建/没有ios：二进制模式的流：

In my experiments with the following code snippet, I did not find any particular difference whether i created the streams with/without the ios:binary mode:

int main()
{
    ifstream ostr("Main.cpp", ios::in | ios::binary | ios::ate);
    if (ostr.is_open())
    {
        int size = ostr.tellg();
        char * memBlock = new char[size + 1];
        ostr.seekg(0, ios::beg);
        ostr.read(memBlock, size);
        memBlock[size] = '\0';
        ofstream file("trip.cpp", ios::out | ios::binary);
        file.write(memBlock, size);
        ostr.close();
    }
}

这里我试图将原始源文件复制到

Here I am trying to copy the original source file into another file with a different name.

我的问题是当打开fstream对象时，读/写调用（与二进制文件IO相关联）之间的区别是什么有/没有ios ::二进制模式？
使用二进制模式有什么优势吗？当执行文件IO时，何时和何时不使用它？

My question is what is the difference between the read/write calls(which are associated with binary file IO) when an fstream object is opened with/without ios::binary mode ? Is there any advantage of using the binary mode ? when to and when not to use it when doing file IO ?

推荐答案

binary 和 text 模式是如何处理\\\
字符。

The only difference between binary and text mode is how the '\n' character is treated.

binary 模式有无翻译。

在文字模式 \\\
写入行尾序列。

在文本模式结束行序列翻译成 \\\
。

In text mode \n is translated on write into a the end of line sequence.
In text mode end of line sequence is translated on read into \n.

结束行序列是平台相关的。

示例：

LF    ('\0x0A'):      Multics, Mac OS X, BeOS, Amiga, RISC OS
CRLF  ('\0x0a\0x0d'): Microsoft Windows, DEC TOPS-10, RT-11
CR:   ('\0x0D'):      TRS-80, Mac OS Pre X
RS:   ('\0x1E'):      QNX pre-POSIX implementation.

这篇关于使用/不使用ios :: binary模式打开流时使用读/写的区别的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！