String Basics

[Stewart Gordon]

Kent Boogaart wrote:
<snip>
> Or they could develop their own string class and be done with it. But this means
> that almost every decent-sized D project will have its own string
> implementation. Obviously not good.
<snip top of upside-down reply>

Only if nearly every D programmer is an OO purist.

http://www.digitalmars.com/d/overview.html
"Who D is Not For"
"Language purists. D is a practical language, and each feature of it is 
evaluated in that light, rather than by an ideal. For example, D has 
constructs and semantics that virtually eliminate the need for pointers 
for ordinary tasks. But pointers are still there, because sometimes the 
rules need to be broken. Similarly, casts are still there for those 
times when the typing system needs to be overridden."

Stewart.

-- 
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS/M d- s:-@ C++@ a->--- UB@ P+ L E@ W++@ N+++ o K-@ w++@ O? M V? PS- 
PE- Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++++ h-- r-- !y
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox.  Please keep replies on 
the 'group where everyone may benefit.