On 8/8/06, Darren Duncan wrote:
At 5:25 PM -0700 8/8/06, Darren Duncan wrote:
<snip>
I'm wondering if it would not be inappropriate to change the name
Str to something more descriptive of its content within the
historical or current wider context.
<snip>
... I have evolved my thoughts to accept that Str is a good-enough
name for something that is strictly defined as a sequence of unicode
characters, and won't continue to recommend strongly that it be
renamed to something else like Text.
I thought your reasons made sense, and would be happy with a "Text"
type, although I don't especially object to "Str" -- as you say, it's
probably good enough given ordinary programming usage.
However the IRC excerpt contained some comments about not conflating
or confusing "Str" with "strings". To me, that would mean they
*should* have different names. If there's a distinction worth
making, then it's worth using distinct terminology, and "Str" vs.
"string" isn't distinct enough: you can tell people they're not
really the same thing, but they ain't gonna believe you.
There's nothing else "Str" could reasonably mean other than "string"
(just as I don't think "regex" can very reasonably mean anything
other than "regular expression").
-David
