> Copying strings is computationally trivial because they are guaranteed to not
> contain complex types like seqs might. You can just copy their entire block
> of memory verbatim once. That can definitely be tens or hundreds of times
> faster than copying individual items.
Probably we can speci
The procs in system above with the signature `proc `&`*[T](x, y: sink seq[T]):
seq[T]` (notice sink) are supposed to optimize by using inplace `add` (which
will not always copy), but they don't seem to do so. Using `add`, if possible,
is what you are supposed to do.
Copying strings is computati
I've been benchmarking a bit to see how different things work (in Arturo) and
one of these is: concatenation/appending-to an array vs a string.
The exact same operation is slower for arrays than for strings. Which is not so
surprising. What _is_ surprising is that what I'm calculating is roughly
