Hi,

In message "Re: Subrange of String subclass => invalid object"
    on 02/01/30, Mathieu Bouchard <matju / sympatico.ca> writes:
|
|
|On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
|> The point is if I provide any Char class, arbitrary half of the world
|> will complain.  As long as the least functionality can be accomplished
|> by code point numbers (see [ruby-talk:32744]), I think it's OK to
|> leave Char class to users.
|
|It would seem to me that a Charset class would be more useful, and would
|make many less small objects; i also say that in the perspective of
|backward compatibility: the current model is that a String holds integers,
|not characters. (whether those integers should represent string bytes, or
|string characters, is separately debatable)

I don't think I got your point.  A Charset class is userful than what?

							matz.