Ugh... for some of what I'm doing, it is nice to know that a string contains only ASCII characters, I really hope that you don't go ahead with removing ASCIIString. (I can treat it as ANSI Latin 1, without any modification, or expand it to UTF-16 or UTF-32 by just widening bytes to 16-bit or 32-bit words, which I can do *very* fast in x86-64 assembly, esp. with some of the newer instructions!)
I do also think it would be nice to have 8-bit (ANSI Latin 1 or binary, not UTF-8), 16-bit (UCS2), and 32-bit (UTF-32) mutable strings... it would make life a lot easier dealing with C/C++ mutable strings... (Having had a MacLisp/Scheme background [some 35 years ago], the idea of having strings normally being immutable does seem like a good decision... I just want both available) Scott On Monday, October 6, 2014 at 2:25:13 PM UTC-4, Stefan Karpinski wrote: > > Well, we're planning on merging ASCIIString and UTF8String so that only > UTF8String exists. There are also other string types where index = > character, such as UTF-32. > > On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Johan Sigfrids <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> Would it not be possible to only define indexing on ASCIIString? >> > >
