On Jul 6, 2013, at 12:05 PM, Jorge <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Even with that explicit length, you can not have a nil inside a string. That would not make any sense. After all, a string is a array of char! :)
I agree, that would be silly if the domain of the array were numbers, since you would know the intended domain and decree that all it contained were numbers. Of course, if some entires were string etc, then you WOULD need something like the above code, so I'm not sure how nil is the issue here.
The comparison was merely between the crisply defined behavior of strings versus the weaker array.