On 06/02/2016 11:03 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 02:44:21PM +0000, deadalnix via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Thursday, 2 June 2016 at 14:29:28 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
It's one thing to make a mistake. Everyone does that sometimes,
and nobody is born knowing complex issues. What matters is if
you're willing to learn new information and correct your errors.
The real ticket out of this is RCStr. It solves a major problem in
the language (compulsive GC) and also a minor occasional annoyance
(autodecoding).
You start to sound like a car salesman. I know nothing about RCStr,
but I'm already starting to resent it.
Same here. It's starting to sound like some unproven newfangled
contraption designed to please the GC-phobic crowd who believe that RC
is the answer to life, the universe, and everything, and who may not
actually adopt D even after we've broken our backs bending over
backwards for them.
I'm sorry, this is completely ridiculous. What is unproven? Reference
counting is a long-standing success story for string handling. I'm using
it because it's good, not to woo users.
(And with a subject like "our sister", this RCStr
business does not sound very appealing at all.)
I'm glad this is mentioned as one of the issues with RCStr.
Whatever happened to
improving *current* string handling for *current* users?
RCStr will improve string handling for current users.
It's making forking Phobos look like a less distant possibility than I
had anticipated. :-(
So you'd fork Phobos because... it adds a good string type?
Andrei
