@flyx you forgot to mention: `std::basic_string`, `std::wstring`,
`std::experimental::basic_string_view`, `std::experimental::string_view` and
`std::experimental::wstring_view`
I really really don't want to hear about anything about GO. GO is a failure
language, OK?
> Everything is split more explicitly, and there is no system wide hybrid type
> that has to be compatible with whatever the backend is.
So, one cstring for `char*`, one for `std::string`, one for `NSString` and one
for JS' `string`? That looks like an awful lot of string types.
> If I would think Go is the future, I would not be here.
Heh... Same with me. Go might have a future, not much of one with me however.
> ... With the result that cstring now means compatible string.
Yeah, I reached a similar conclusion (on all the **c** prefixed types, as I
have used **nim js*
Yeah, i think c* should belong to its own module. I have some code that relays
on it, but this is a needed change.
You don't need to like Go, to agree that something in Go has ben done in a
clean way. If I would think Go is the future, I would not be here. But I can't
deny that there are a few things in Go that I learned to like.
My opinion? Everything is fine, document it, Go is fascism.
