string is rarely useful as a function argument

[foobar]

On Wednesday, 28 December 2011 at 19:48:28 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe 
wrote:
> On Wednesday, 28 December 2011 at 19:30:04 UTC, Andrei 
> Alexandrescu wrote:
>> Implementation would entail a change in the compiler.
>
> I don't think I agree. Wouldn't something like this work?
>
> ===
>
> struct string {
>       immutable(char)[] rep;
>       alias rep this;
>       auto opAssign(immutable(char)[] rhs) {
>               rep = rhs;
>               return this;
>       }
>
>       this(immutable(char)[] rhs) {
>               rep = rhs;
>       }
>       // disable these here so it isn't passed on to .rep
>       @disable void opSlice(){  assert(0);  };
>       @disable size_t length() {  assert(0);  };
> }
>
> ===
>
> I did some quick tests and the basics seemed ok:
>
> /* paste impl from above */
>
> import std.string : replace;
>
> void main() {
>       string a = "test"; // works
>
>       a = a.replace("test", "mang"); // works
>       // a = a[0..1]; // correctly fails to compile
>       assert(0, a); // works
> }

My thinking exactly. Of course we can't put "@disable" right away 
and should start with "@deprecated" to allow for a proper 
migration period.
I'd also like a transition of the string related functions to 
this type. the previous ones can remain as simple 
wrappers/aliases/whatever for backwards compatibility.