Am 30.09.2016 um 04:16 schrieb Richard A. O'Keefe:
On 30/09/16 4:18 AM, Joachim Durchholz wrote:
Each language does define its preferred string representation.
Java again: it has *two* string representations baked into the language.
There is a single standard representation. I'm not even aware of a second one, and I've been programming Java for quite a while now. Unless you mean StringBuilder/StringBuffer (that would be three String types then). However, these classes are by no means "preferred" in practice: the vast majority of APIs demands and returns String objects. Even then, Java has its preferred string representation nailed down pretty strongly: a hidden array of 16-bit Unicode code points, referenced by a descriptor object (the actual String), immutable.
The Smalltalk system I use most has - read-only strings (preferred) - unique read-only strings - mutable strings - substrings (positionable read-only slices) - extensible strings - streams over strings - lazy concatenations of strings - read-only byte arrays viewed as strings - mutable byte arrays viewed as strings
Ah, Smalltalk. I haven't looked at that in ages. I'll give you that these classes all exist, but I am not sure whether a Smalltalk programmer would consider them all equivalent or not.