On Sat, 07 Mar 2009 07:11:45 -0500, Burton Radons wrote: > Perl would be more powerful if its strings > were mutable, not less, although not by much > due to the interpreter.
I think we have a terminology issue. We have character arrays (some fixed length, others variable length - doesn't matter). In D's world view, data can be invariant (nothing gets to change it), const (other routines can modify it but this routine will not), or mutable (anything can change it). So in D we have some character arrays that are invariant (eg. Literals), some are const, and some are mutable. It is a pity that D's term "string" is being used in discussions as if it is synonymous with character array - but it is not. It only refers to certain types of character arrays - the invariant ones. We really need some simple terms for const and mutable character arrays. -- Derek Parnell Melbourne, Australia skype: derek.j.parnell
