From: Sean Russell <ser@...>
Date: 2002-07-08T14:01:54+09:00
Subject: Re: is there a better string.each?

Hal E. Fulton wrote:

> Which is precisely the fallacy of your "string
> is an array" argument. You were saying: "An array
> is an ordered collection. A string is an ordered
> collection. Therefore, a string is an array."

And what /I'm/ saying is: it looks like an array, it acts like an array, it 
has a practically identical method set as an array, and -- hey! -- it 
happens to be implemented as an array.  It is an array.

Y'know, the original argument wasn't whether a String is an Array, but 
rather that a String is an array (notice the lower case 'A') of characters, 
and that it should act as such.  I don't give a rotten apple about how it 
is internally implemented, as long as it is reasonably fast.  But when 
dealing with Strings, I usually, at some point, find myself wishing for a 
quick, easy, intuitive mechanism for itterating over the atomic units of a 
String: the characters.

Further, before we go much further, a long while back I mentioned that I 
fully expect the upcoming i17m support to provide this, since it would 
probably be a bugger to do efficiently with the current String 
implementation (although I don't know that for sure).  Which, if true, sort 
of makes this whole discussion moot.

--- SER