Re: Update, near finalization Per Bothner (13 Apr 2005 22:55 UTC)
Re: Update, near finalization Per Bothner 13 Apr 2005 22:55 UTC
> 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