colin / invoca.com wrote:
> > I prefer String.new() to "".dup because the former describes intention (of creating a buffer).
> 
> Ok. I've attached a rev3 patch that uses `String.new` instead of `''.dup`.

Thanks.  Committed as r52981

> > In fact, my best choice is introducing String#+ that returns a mutable copy of a string.
> 
> How would that be different from the current binary string operator `String#+` that does string concatenation?

It actually calls the "+@" method as implemented in r52917 / [Feature #11782]
But according to [ruby-core:71924], maybe it's not a good idea...