There's More Than One Way To Do It, and by "do it" we mean "refer to the programming language by name"pic.twitter.com/87y5BZ4Elw
Show this thread
-
And, well, .elems sounds like a list method, I'd be probably freaked out if it suddenly started to tell me about graphemes/characters/whichever in a Unicode string.
I actually think it's really good to draw a honking great dividing line between "strings" meaning Unicode text objects and "strings" meaning arrays of octets. Give them very distinct APIs and so on. Programming languages which confuse the two are broken IMO
-
-
Perl 6 actually makes a bunch of good decisions here! The `.graphs` and `.chars` methods are just what you need The problem is every Perl 6 string is still *also* an array, of length 1, for some reason
-
Yeah, it has some pretty badass Unicode support. But all I said was that I don't particularly mind that single items can be treated as 1-element lists (as long as this is explicit, not just some trap assumption by the language at times) - explicit call of a list method suffices.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Oh, yes, that's one of the things that Python got right and I really enjoyed about it. Shame nobody really followed suit so far.
-
Agree, it's like the killer feature of Python 3 over Python 2
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.