On 02/07/14 16:04, Per Bothner wrote: > > In other words: Supporting string-replace! has no extra overheads beyond > requiring an "indirect" representation. The latter is forced anyway if > you support mutability and full Unicode, unless you use 3- or 4-byte > characters. > Even if you do use 3- or 4-byte characters, indirection is worth it, because > mutable fixed-size strings is an essentially-useless feature. >
Also, said indirection may be bent to support an efficient substring operation, by sharing a common character array (although you may well regret also allowing mutation in that case...) ABS -- Alaric Snell-Pym http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/alaric/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
