From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <johnh@ichips.intel.com>
Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A725EBC88
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Thu, 10 Feb 2005 22:18:44 +0100 (CET)
Received: from orsfmr002.jf.intel.com (fmr17.intel.com [134.134.136.16])
	by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j1ALIhK1004982
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Thu, 10 Feb 2005 22:18:44 +0100
Received: from orsfmr100.jf.intel.com (orsfmr100.jf.intel.com [10.7.209.16])
	by orsfmr002.jf.intel.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/d: major-outer.mc,v 1.1 2004/09/17 17:50:56 root Exp $) with ESMTP id j1ALIgTq019453;
	Thu, 10 Feb 2005 21:18:42 GMT
Received: from orsmsxvs040.jf.intel.com (orsmsxvs040.jf.intel.com [192.168.65.206])
	by orsfmr100.jf.intel.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/d: major-inner.mc,v 1.2 2004/09/17 18:05:01 root Exp $) with SMTP id j1ALIRhY025493;
	Thu, 10 Feb 2005 21:18:42 GMT
Received: from orsmsx331.amr.corp.intel.com ([192.168.65.56])
 by orsmsxvs040.jf.intel.com (SAVSMTP 3.1.2.35) with SMTP id M2005021013184217789
 ; Thu, 10 Feb 2005 13:18:42 -0800
Received: from orsmsx407.amr.corp.intel.com ([192.168.65.50]) by orsmsx331.amr.corp.intel.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211);
	 Thu, 10 Feb 2005 13:18:42 -0800
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [Caml-list] String to list to string
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 13:18:41 -0800
Message-ID: <012676D607FCF54E986746512C22CE7D02DF7A4E@orsmsx407>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: [Caml-list] String to list to string
Thread-Index: AcUPqPR8CcfbEi6bTCGpDrjhfQH6OAADO3Qw
From: "Harrison, John R" <johnh@ichips.intel.com>
To: "brogoff" <brogoff@speakeasy.net>
Cc: <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>,
	"Harrison, John R" <johnh@ichips.intel.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Feb 2005 21:18:42.0228 (UTC) FILETIME=[18AB6F40:01C50FB6]
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.44
X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 420BCFB3.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)!
X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 johnh:01 substrings:01 arrays:01 trivial:01 ocaml:01 arrays:01 immutable:01 data:02 variant:02 functional:02 ichips:02 string:03 string:03 character:03 
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on yquem.inria.fr
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled 
	version=3.0.2
X-Spam-Level: 

| My preference for functional string processing is, as I said,
substrings.
| They are convenient, and encapsulate the index manipulations in the
data
| type. I'm almost certain you've seen them, what's your issue?

None whatsoever. I'm perfectly willing to believe that some variant
of character arrays is the best string representation. (Provided
they are immutable!)

But for the relatively trivial string manipulations that I (and
quite possibly many other OCaml users) care about, lists of
characters are very convenient and perfectly adequate. So I don't
feel your hyperbolic dismissals of such a representation as
"dumb" and "ridiculous" are justified. You could say that with
equal force about any use of lists instead of arrays, and I'm
sure there are plenty of programmers who would.

John.