Semantics of toString

[Lutger]

Justin Johansson wrote:

> I assert that the semantics of "toString" or similarly named/purposed
> methods/functions in many PL's (including and not limited to D) is
> ill-defined.
> 
> To put this statement into perspective, I would be most appreciative of D
> NG readers responding with their own idea(s) of what the semantics of
> "toString" are (or should be) in a language agnostic ideology.
> 

My other reply didn't take the language agnostic into account, sorry. 

Semantics of toString would depend on the object, I would think there are 
three general types of objects:

1. objects with only one sensible or one clear default string 
representations, like integers. Maybe even none of these exist (except 
strings themselves?) 

2. objects that, given some formatting options or locale have a clear string 
representation. floating points, dates, curreny and the like. 

3. objects that have no sensible default representation.

toString() would not make sense for 3) type objects and only for 2) type 
objects as part of a formatting / localization package. 

toString() as a debugging aid sometimes doubles as a formatter for 1) and 2) 
class objects, but that may be more confusing than it's worth.