From: botp <botpena@...>
Date: 2010-02-09T17:28:04+09:00
Subject: Re: Strings -- was: Re: Why Ruby?

on Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Robert Klemme
<shortcutter@googlemail.com> wrote:

> IMHO what 1.9 does better is the awareness of encoding. ...
> On one hand I can see how this all came about and class String is
> really versatile.

agree.

> On the other hand, it seems that String is growing
> overly complex.  Maybe Ruby 2.0 should be used to clean this up and
> really separate handling of binary and character data.

can i disagree? i still like to think they are all strings. It's the
methods and their names that's difficult to implem. who say's binary
data were easy, if it were, wouldn't it be called string..?

best regards -botp