String hierarchy (was: UTC-8 (was ...))
lex at cc.gatech.edu
Mon Mar 20 10:23:55 UTC 2000
"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.
More information about the Squeak-dev