Re: Another No Vote On Strings (was Re: Stupid Newbie-sounding question.)
On Wed, 2 Jun 2004 20:23:25 -0500, Kat <gertie at visionsix.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 14:19:39 -0700, "Michael J. Sabal"
>> <guest at RapidEuphoria.com> wrote:
>>
>> >posted by: Michael J. Sabal <m_sabal at yahoo.com>
>> >
>> >Pete Lomax wrote:
>> >>
>> >> As I said before, I'll agree with an argument against this on
>> >> technical grounds. Non-string Eu is perfectly useable, and wonderfully
>> >> fast. I might favour string handling, but it is votes what count.
>
>Votes count with RDS?
YES. You not been paying attention?
Fair enough, I guess RC has a block vote of around 5000 
)
(and NO STRINGS seems to be winning by a landslide even without that)
It *IS* rather rare, but RC folded on x[1..$] just last year.
That was asked for HERE, and you will see that in 2.5
(Only, I guess, if you buy it, that is ;--)))
Arguing a point/complaining loudly/voicing your opinions, but just
getting nowhere can be rather disheartening.
Buttoning your lip, and then wondering why no-one ever listens to you
is just plain stupid, though.
>What about associated lists?
>type[1] = "s"
>data[1] = "John"
>
>type[2] = "i"
>data[2] = 47
>
>Now, a cute lil print routine to look at type and do appropriately unto data,
>and problem is solved?
Maybe you missed my fudge on that:
http://www.listfilter.com/cgi-bin/esearch.exu?fromMonth=5&fromYear=9&toMonth=6&toYear=9&postedBy=lomax&keywords=tInt
(Crikey, can't believe that is only 31st May; feels much longer ago)
Surely you have a routine that will do a *fair* job, as do I:
(http://palacebuilders.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/eppp.html)
A native string type in Eu would make it MUCH better, but would, of
course, make Eu slower.
I'm perfectly OK that native string handling, which I want, has been
discussed, and the consensus appears to be it will not go in.
Such is life
Regards,
Pete
PS but I'm probably a bit more devious that you give me credit for
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
