Greg Wooledge (2018-04-04): > The problem is, you reject every single example that everyone gives > you.
I do not reject them, I refute them. > I don't know what you expect from us. Acknowledge that I am right once I have refuted all your examples and you have eventually understood my point. At this time, you have not yet understood. > You just seem to have Decided, for reasons known only to you, that > The Character Length Of A String Is Not Useful. Despite literally > decades of programs that have used strlen() in various ways. Decades of programs that were variously limited or flawed. Most of them working only with a subset of English and English-like languages. > Have you never been given ANY kind of problem that involves analysis > of character strings? Ever? At all? Analysis? Yes, of course. Tons of them. They are all about SCANNING the string, not jumping randomly in it. > What if the question is "Find all the English words that have an E > in the 5th position and a U in the 7th"? Yes, what? Who would ever ask such a question? What is the point of such a question? The point of such a question is only to try and disprove my point, but my point is about useful operations, and therefore artificial questions like that will not dent it. > I mean, seriously, at some point you either have to accept that one > of our examples is good enough to justify the existence of strlen() > and character-based string indexing, or we just label you a loon and > ignore everything you say henceforth. To be honest, I do not care much what "you" think about me. Regards, -- Nicolas George
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
