On 06/11/14 15:44, Artur Skawina wrote: > If, instead, you create a string-specific 'countUntil' that returns > a type that holds both the byte and code-point counts and implicitly > converts to the latter, then you can have a 'takeExactly' overload > that uses the extra info to avoid the unnecessary decoding and is able > to directly return slices. The overhead is minimal; one extra integer > that's passed around, and often completely eliminated by function inlining. > But now you don't need to write a string-specific version of every > algorithm. (Of course this description is slightly oversimplified)
Well, for safety, you'd most likely want to pass around the range too (ie string slice, or just the pointer as the min-length is implied); so it's two size_ts, not one. Still, the overhead is tiny and the advantage of not having to special-case for strings everywhere is worth it. artur
