Re: Setting array length to 0 discards reserved allocation?

[Jakob Ovrum via Digitalmars-d]

On Saturday, 26 July 2014 at 23:06:02 UTC, Andrew Godfrey wrote:
Thereafter can come sub-slice examples and so on.
Does this make sense?

Yes, the reference documentation is pretty terrible with naming 
of various array concepts.

IIRC, when this was discussed in the past, a majority seemed to 
be in favour of using "slice" and "dynamic array" for their 
respective concepts instead of the current situation, but I also 
remember there was some opposition (for reason I can't remember). 
A pull request updating the documentation to use slice/dynamic 
array might weed them out ;)