"Andrew C. Greenberg" <werdna at gate.net> wrote:

> I am not certain I agree that mutable strings has the advantage of 
> efficient use of memory.  With mutable strings, the substring and 
> slice operations require a copy.  With immutable strings, it might 
> suffice to generate a Decorator with offset and size data.  Of 
> course, much depends upon the particular applications, as keeping a 
> pointer to a large string can be inefficient if all that needs to 
> remain is the slice.
> 
> How are these operations implemented in NextStep?

By the way, some object memory's have a slice object, along with a
garbage collector that knows how to deal with them.


Lex