string is rarely useful as a function argument

[Jakob Ovrum]

On Wednesday, 28 December 2011 at 16:27:15 UTC, Andrei 
Alexandrescu wrote:
> So immutable(char)[] is the best choice for a correct string 
> abstraction compared against both char[] and const(char)[]. In 
> fact it's in a way good that const(char)[] takes longer to 
> type, because it also carries larger liabilities.

Also, 'in char[]', which is conceptually much safer, isn't that 
much longer to type.

It would be cool if 'scope' was actually implemented apart from 
an optimization though.