Hello people--
According to the documentation,
> If you don't care about initial capacity, a more elegant way to
> create a new string buffer is to write:
> SBUF" " clone
However, according to my listener,
> (scratchpad) SBUF" " SBUF" " eq?
> --- Data stack
> f
... from which I infer that the SBUF" " word actually creates a new
string-buffer instance each time it is called. So, is there some
non-obvious reason why it is preferable to use 'clone', or are the docs
wrong/out-of-date?
BTW, the same question applies to BV{ } and, I would imagine, some other
empty literal sequences.
--
Matt Gushee
m...@gushee.net
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
_______________________________________________
Factor-talk mailing list
Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
