Difference between revisions of "Talk:String"
(Created page with '== Primitive Datatype? == Are we sure that it is considered a primitive datatype in most languages? I work in Java, and it is not primitive, but has its own properties as a stri…') |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Are we sure that it is considered a primitive datatype in most languages? I work in Java, and it is not primitive, but has its own properties as a string of characters. --[[User:Vborza|Vborza]] 03:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC) | Are we sure that it is considered a primitive datatype in most languages? I work in Java, and it is not primitive, but has its own properties as a string of characters. --[[User:Vborza|Vborza]] 03:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC) | ||
| + | :Strings in Java are immutable and have special operator support (for example +), so I think they are in many ways primitive. The String class is also similar (but with some more functionality) to the wrapper classes, like Integer. If you still feel strongly about the wording you can change "most" to "many", or something like that. - [[User:Smitschu|Smitschu]] 17:17, 30 March 2011 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 13:17, 30 March 2011
Primitive Datatype?
Are we sure that it is considered a primitive datatype in most languages? I work in Java, and it is not primitive, but has its own properties as a string of characters. --Vborza 03:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
- Strings in Java are immutable and have special operator support (for example +), so I think they are in many ways primitive. The String class is also similar (but with some more functionality) to the wrapper classes, like Integer. If you still feel strongly about the wording you can change "most" to "many", or something like that. - Smitschu 17:17, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
