Don wrote: > I suspect that string, wstring should have been the primary types and > had a .codepoints property, which returned a ubyte[] resp. ushort[] > reference to the data. It's too late, of course. The extra value you get > by having a specific type for 'this is a code point for a UTF8 string' > seems to be very minor, compared to just using a ubyte.
If it's not too late to completely change the semantics of char[], then it's also not too late to dump 'char' completely. If it /is/ too late to remove 'char', then 'char[]' should retain the current semantics and a new string type should be added for the new semantics. -- Rainer Deyke - rain...@eldwood.com
