28 Jan
2011
28 Jan
'11
9:55 p.m.
On 1/28/11 1:23 PM, David Bergman wrote:
We should definitely separate these two concerns quite clearly and explain*exactly* what the purpose of that immutable finite sequence type is; is it intended*only* for use from text-handling "higher-level" notions? If so, why? And, where did that "sequence of*anything*" come from then?
My understanding was that calling it a sequence of bytes was done to explicitly indicate that the data structure can handle *any* sequence of bytes, not just text, so that it is a generic data structure rather than one specialized for text-handling or some other "higher-level" purpose. Cheers, Gregory Crosswhite