On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Daniel Carrera <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 8 March 2016 at 15:52, Milan Bouchet-Valat <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Array("hello") >> This case is tricky since Array{Int}(1) creates a vector with one >> element, not an array containing 1. So for consistency we have to raise >> an error for non-integer arguments. > > > > Array(1) fails, and Array{Int}(1) gives me 140180935446712 ??!!! > > julia> Array{Int}(1) > 1-element Array{Int64,1}: > 140180935446712
isbits types are not initialized. Use zeros if you want to zero initialize them. > > >> > String(10) >> String isn't a concrete type currently in Julia, that's the old name >> for AbstractString. But the plans is to move to a single string type, >> so this could work. I agree that it would be more logical than writing >> string() in small case as currently. > > > > Yeah. Since `string()` works, String() could just be made to do what > `string()` does today. > > Can you tell me about the plans to move to a single string type? Does that > mean that the proliferation of string types (AbstractString, ASCIIString, > UTF8String, etc) is going to end? > > >> >> Lower-case functions have been deprecated as much as possible. See >> above about string vs. String. so I don't think we're going to add new >> ones. > > > Ok. What's the issue with lower-case functions? > > Cheers, > Daniel.
