std::string s = 0; // = nullptr ---> throws `std::logic_error`
Above statement results in segmentation fault. Why is it allowed?
[At least the constructor overload of nullptr should have been =delete, isn't it?]
In that case, the constructor to a const char* is called due to the way overload resolution works.
And if that pointer is nullptr then the standard library attempts to dereference a null pointer value with undefined results.
std::string is already hideously bloated. My guess is that nobody has managed to convince the C++ standards committee of the merits of having a std::string(std::nullptr_t) constructor.