Re: Using empty_string as the only "" string

[Andreas Schwab]

David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:

> Aren't grounded at all.  (concat "a" "b") does not make "b" part of
> the result.  So (concat "a" "") and (concat "b" "") would not share
> the same "" even if one replaced both of them by the same object.
>
> Every created string is a separate object not containing any other
> string as a part.  The same is not true for lists.  You can, for
> example, modify a sublist and in the process change the list
> containing it.
>
> This does not happen for substrings.

Since you can't modify the empty string there is no contradiction.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, address@hidden
SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
PGP key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."