String types are fine. How about your code?

Re:String types are fine. How about your code? by skrebbel on Thursday November 28, 2013 @06:59AM (#6814180)

Good point!

It is my opinion, however, that string types are fine, just not perfect. I should have maybe made that clearer.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:String types are fine. How about your code? by zokier on Thursday November 28, 2013 @07:07AM (#6814204)

Yeah, I was bit confused when your conclusions seem to match the original "strings are broken" posts conclusions.

The whole problem is that current string types enable broken unsafe behavior on Unicode ("human only" in your parlance) strings. Current string types are broken because they do not enforce the requirement that string operations are done only on plain ASCII ("machine only") strings.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:String types are fine. How about your code? by ipedrazas on Thursday November 28, 2013 @07:59AM (#6814318)

what if I have to create strings with non ASCII chars?

Calling ASCII "machine only" is totally wrong. I agree that encoding/decoding is a pain, but we have different string encodings for a reason.

[ Parent | on HN ]