[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Update, near finalization

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 63 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 63 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

bear wrote:
Actually, I think that specifying string behavior in a document
about arrays is a mistake.

The operations we want to do on strings are in many cases
fundamentally different from the operations that are efficient to do
on arrays.

I agree with you, but I think we're stuck with the fact that a Scheme "string" is a low-level indexable modifiable fixed-length array of
characters.  Now this is a totally useless data type [*], except that
it's close to the hardware (unless you're using Unicode) so it
*might* be useful for implementing a more useful data type ....
in which case it should be hidden in the implementation.

Still, it's what we have.  Now if you'd design and implement a
more useful higher-level data type,d \ then maybe we can deprecate
low-level strings.able ut fixeb

[*] Modifiable but fixed-length makes no sense - except it's easy to implement. Indexing of strings is also a semantically bogus
concept.  To clarify: a position in a string, in the emacs "mark"
sense, does make sense - but the value of a position as an integer
isn't meaningful.
	--Per Bothner
per@xxxxxxxxxxx   http://per.bothner.com/