Walter Bright , dans le message (digitalmars.D:147161), a écrit : > On 10/20/2011 9:06 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: >> It's this very problem that leads some people to argue that string should be >> its own type which holds an array of code units (which can be accessed when >> needed) rather than doing what we do now where we try and treat a string as >> both an array of chars and a range of dchars. The result is schizophrenic. > > Making such a string type would be terribly inefficient. It would make D > completely uncompetitive for processing strings.
I definitely agree with you, but I have a piece of news for you : The whole phobos alreaday treats strings as a dchar ranges, and IS inefficient for processing strings. The fact is: char[] is not char[] in phobos. It is Range!dchar. This is aweful and schizophrenic, and also inefficient. The purpose was to allow people to use strings without knowing anything about unicode. That is why Jonathan proposed having a specific string structure to manipulate strings without having to worry about unicode, just like how strings are currently manipulated in phobos, and letting char[] be char[], and be as efficient as they should be. I was not there when it was decided to treat strings as dchar ranges, but now it is done. The only thing I can do is use ubyte[] instead of char[] so that phobos treat them as proper arrays, and propose optimized overloads for various phobos algorithm to make them as efficient as they should be (which I didn't find the time to do yet). -- Christophe
