Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Why String?

Why String?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
comquestion
70 Posts 49 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • D DerekT P

    Everybody every programmer I knew pronounced it that way. Even professional Fortran and Cobol programmers recognised the convention from their early Basic days. (Who didn't learn programming via Basic?)

    R Offline
    R Offline
    RefugeeFromSlashDot
    wrote on last edited by
    #39

    Then there are people like me who never heard of it pronounced that way until we read it here. In the DEC world it seemed be pronounced A-dollar. A% was pronounced A-percent on those rare times when one couldn't tell from the context whether we meant an integer or floating-point variable. Perhaps it's an architecture difference; those of us who started in the mini world vs. those who started in the micro world.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • A AspDotNetDev

      I was just thinking that it seems a bit odd that "string" is so commonly used by programmers to refer to some text. I would think "text" would be more appropriate. If we are using "string" just because it refers to a string of characters (aka, a sequence of characters), then why not also call numbers "strings" (as they are strings/sequences of digits and some other characters)? Any theories as to why "string" prevailed?

      Thou mewling ill-breeding pignut!

      B Offline
      B Offline
      BrainiacV
      wrote on last edited by
      #40

      I guess it is time for this grizzled olde tyme programmer to edjumacate the youngin's. Back when core (ya know, that pre-RAM stuff) was still being strung by hand and was measured in single digit K's (you know what a K is doncha? --a millionth of a gigabyte, or thereabouts...) To teach the programmers who had just emerged from the primordial slime about a sequence of characters instead of the pure numbers that they were used to, they came up with the idea of describing them as akin to beads strung on a "string". "A whale of a tale, and it's all true, I swear by my tattoo."

      Psychosis at 10 Film at 11 Those who do not remember the past, are doomed to repeat it. Those who do not remember the past, cannot build upon it.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • R Roger Wright

        Here, this[^] may help...

        Will Rogers never met me.

        S Offline
        S Offline
        spencepk
        wrote on last edited by
        #41

        Too bad it doesn't come in 55-gallon drums :(

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • M Michael Kingsford Gray

          I did not learn programming from BASIC, for one. As it has not been invented when I learned programming. Is that a valid answer? I accept your correction that you are not aware of any BASIC programmer who did not pronounce it "that way". But that is not my lookout. I began with FORTRAN, an a CDC6600. I subsequently learned BASIC from its inception, and made a large portion of my long professional career from programming in it. But, I have NEVER heard of this vocalisation until you raised it. I have been a professional FORTRAN programmer since 1973, and a COBOL programmer since 1975. Yet I do not recognise this so-called 'convention' in one fraction of an iota. Not with me, nor any of my compartriates. Strange, that. I still call "bovine faeces".

          P Offline
          P Offline
          PhilLenoir
          wrote on last edited by
          #42

          Funny that, both the VIC-20 and BBC Micro manuals used exactly that convention. I guess that it depends which BASIC you learned and from which course or manual. These varieties of BASIC only read the first two characters of variable names, although you could make your code more readable using more.

          Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • A AspDotNetDev

            I was just thinking that it seems a bit odd that "string" is so commonly used by programmers to refer to some text. I would think "text" would be more appropriate. If we are using "string" just because it refers to a string of characters (aka, a sequence of characters), then why not also call numbers "strings" (as they are strings/sequences of digits and some other characters)? Any theories as to why "string" prevailed?

            Thou mewling ill-breeding pignut!

            D Offline
            D Offline
            Dominic Amann
            wrote on last edited by
            #43

            Because a string denotes a sequence of arbitrary characters, whereas text connotes readable language of some kind.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • A AspDotNetDev

              I was just thinking that it seems a bit odd that "string" is so commonly used by programmers to refer to some text. I would think "text" would be more appropriate. If we are using "string" just because it refers to a string of characters (aka, a sequence of characters), then why not also call numbers "strings" (as they are strings/sequences of digits and some other characters)? Any theories as to why "string" prevailed?

              Thou mewling ill-breeding pignut!

              P Offline
              P Offline
              PhilLenoir
              wrote on last edited by
              #44

              Numbers aren't strings of digits but "Strings" are strings of characters. Base numeric data types are all of fixed size, but text data always had the problem of being of indeterminate length and required a terminator (as in C), a size and data (as in Pascal) or padded fixed length (early databases).

              Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • M MikeD 2

                Michael K Gray wrote:

                Absolute intercoursing-bullsh*t.

                I see your bullsh*t and raise you a pile of horsesh*t Whilst possibly not quite as old long term developer as you I learnt basic in around 81 and remember that A$ was always pronounced A String So whilst it may be a slight exaggeration to say that it was always known that way it certainly was a common way to talk about it. Even on this side of the pond

                D Offline
                D Offline
                DarkTizzy
                wrote on last edited by
                #45

                Absolutely A-String FTW! Although I much prefer G$. :cool:

                R 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • A AspDotNetDev

                  I was just thinking that it seems a bit odd that "string" is so commonly used by programmers to refer to some text. I would think "text" would be more appropriate. If we are using "string" just because it refers to a string of characters (aka, a sequence of characters), then why not also call numbers "strings" (as they are strings/sequences of digits and some other characters)? Any theories as to why "string" prevailed?

                  Thou mewling ill-breeding pignut!

                  U Offline
                  U Offline
                  User 8102478
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #46

                  Has to do with the internal representation. A string is an array of char. A number (int, float etc) is a 4-64 byte binary. A string is typically though of as variable length, whereas a number is a definite size. To look at a number as a sequence of digits, you are actually converting from a binary representation to a string. That sequence of digits is a sequence of char, which is to say its actually a string.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • A AspDotNetDev

                    I was just thinking that it seems a bit odd that "string" is so commonly used by programmers to refer to some text. I would think "text" would be more appropriate. If we are using "string" just because it refers to a string of characters (aka, a sequence of characters), then why not also call numbers "strings" (as they are strings/sequences of digits and some other characters)? Any theories as to why "string" prevailed?

                    Thou mewling ill-breeding pignut!

                    U Offline
                    U Offline
                    User 8230845
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #47

                    I've been programming since 1979 and that is always how I heard it pronounced "A-Sting" I also to this day call the $ a String and the ! a Bang etc.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • E englebart

                      The next project I start or join on the "ground floor" will ban String/Text as a datatype. Everything declared as a String could and should have a more descriptive data type. Which API is more descriptive? assign(String, String) OR assign(EmployeeId, DepartmentId)

                      A Offline
                      A Offline
                      aojepojefpoejafpeoj
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #48

                      Right, because assign(int, int) or creating a wrapper for string named EmployeeId is much better.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • A AspDotNetDev

                        I was just thinking that it seems a bit odd that "string" is so commonly used by programmers to refer to some text. I would think "text" would be more appropriate. If we are using "string" just because it refers to a string of characters (aka, a sequence of characters), then why not also call numbers "strings" (as they are strings/sequences of digits and some other characters)? Any theories as to why "string" prevailed?

                        Thou mewling ill-breeding pignut!

                        M Offline
                        M Offline
                        Member 8348554
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #49

                        Why a duck? brian

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • L Lost User

                          Back in the day, Computers were made of rope and wood , and each character was knotted onto a length of string. Sometimes the string would unravel. Hence the early programmers mantra - did it compile? I'm a frayed knot.

                          MVVM# - See how I did MVVM my way ___________________________________________ Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011 .\\axxx (That's an 'M')

                          K Offline
                          K Offline
                          Kythen
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #50

                          You know what makes that even more amusing? You're actually correct! The ancient Inca used knotted strings called quipu[^] as a sort of calculator. :cool:

                          L 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • R Roger Wright

                            I think it's an unconscious desire to return to the good old days of BASIC where a variable was identified as containing text characters by using the suffix $. The art of programming has never recovered from the damage done by constructs like, >10 DATA "MY", "TEXT", "DATA" >20 READ A$, B$, C$ >30 LPRINT A$, B$, C$ >50 GOTO 10 >9999 END >RUN Back in the day, A$ was even pronounced, "A-string." :-D

                            Will Rogers never met me.

                            M Offline
                            M Offline
                            MSBassSinger
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #51

                            Sounds like string theory. :)

                            R C 2 Replies Last reply
                            0
                            • A AspDotNetDev

                              I was just thinking that it seems a bit odd that "string" is so commonly used by programmers to refer to some text. I would think "text" would be more appropriate. If we are using "string" just because it refers to a string of characters (aka, a sequence of characters), then why not also call numbers "strings" (as they are strings/sequences of digits and some other characters)? Any theories as to why "string" prevailed?

                              Thou mewling ill-breeding pignut!

                              J Offline
                              J Offline
                              jeramyRR
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #52

                              I thought it was called String because we are "stringing" along characters. Since it's really an array of single characters, that makes sense to me.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • V V 0

                                I use it because it reminds me of something else[^]...

                                V.

                                F Offline
                                F Offline
                                fred_
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #53

                                NOT WORK SAFE

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • D DarkTizzy

                                  Absolutely A-String FTW! Although I much prefer G$. :cool:

                                  R Offline
                                  R Offline
                                  Ralph Little
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #54

                                  Perhaps it is a US thing. I cut my programming teeth on a Vic20 and it was always A-dollar. I've never heard the A-string version in my entire 30 year experience in the industry (not that I would have heard either version in the last 25 of them, of course :D )

                                  G M A 3 Replies Last reply
                                  0
                                  • A AspDotNetDev

                                    Thanks, I can't get tied up at the moment.

                                    Thou mewling ill-breeding pignut!

                                    R Offline
                                    R Offline
                                    Ralph Little
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #55

                                    I would have thought they you people would have COTTONED on to how tiresome this THREAD is becoming. :D

                                    L 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • A AspDotNetDev

                                      I was just thinking that it seems a bit odd that "string" is so commonly used by programmers to refer to some text. I would think "text" would be more appropriate. If we are using "string" just because it refers to a string of characters (aka, a sequence of characters), then why not also call numbers "strings" (as they are strings/sequences of digits and some other characters)? Any theories as to why "string" prevailed?

                                      Thou mewling ill-breeding pignut!

                                      I Offline
                                      I Offline
                                      Indrora
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #56

                                      AspDotNetDev wrote:

                                      I was just thinking that it seems a bit odd that "string" is so commonly used by programmers to refer to some text. I would think "text" would be more appropriate.

                                      you have to take into consideration the fact that string refers to a very specific thing, depending on the language:

                                      • A sequence of chars, terminated in a NULL(0x00)
                                      • A sequence of chars, pre-pended with their length as a uint8(This is how Pascal and .NET BinaryReaders do it)
                                      • A fixed-width space that is assumed to have character data in it (MySQL VARCHAR)
                                      • an N-Length columnar space containing character data (SQLite's TEXT field)
                                      • a String literal, in C* defined as a sequence of characters wrapped in '"'.
                                      • a Verbatim String in C#, allowing for '\n' and other punctuation to be preserved.
                                      • A descriptive element attached to an object (Z-Code/Inform)

                                      String, I feel, is used to encompass more of an idea, since "text" is ambiguous (is it a certain length? A certain kind? UTF?

                                      AspDotNetDev wrote:

                                      If we are using "string" just because it refers to a string of characters (aka, a sequence of characters), then why not also call numbers "strings" (as they are strings/sequences of digits and some other characters)?

                                      Because ints aren't strings of numbers. Sure, in TCL and a few other languages, things are natively strings, but that counts only for convencience (and in the case of TCL, efficiency). In C* languages (this includes Java, Python, etc), int and float are stashed as their binary values -- the value 128 isn't stored as "128" -- its as 0x80. If we did store them as chars, think of how much memory it would take to store the Uint64 maximum value: 18,446,744,073,709,551,615 (thanks, MSDN!). That's 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF in hex, a much, much smaller value in-memory.

                                      ---- "Pinky, are you thinking what im thinking?" "I Dunno brain, how many licks DOES it take to get to the tootsie roll center of a tootsie pop?" "You want me to calculate that? or should we take over the world?" "ooh! OooooOOOooH! lets find out!"

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • A AspDotNetDev

                                        I was just thinking that it seems a bit odd that "string" is so commonly used by programmers to refer to some text. I would think "text" would be more appropriate. If we are using "string" just because it refers to a string of characters (aka, a sequence of characters), then why not also call numbers "strings" (as they are strings/sequences of digits and some other characters)? Any theories as to why "string" prevailed?

                                        Thou mewling ill-breeding pignut!

                                        H Offline
                                        H Offline
                                        Harley L Pebley
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #57

                                        A couple theories on StackOverflow[^] The two prevailing ones indicate it's either from typography or mathematics.

                                        M 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • R Ralph Little

                                          Perhaps it is a US thing. I cut my programming teeth on a Vic20 and it was always A-dollar. I've never heard the A-string version in my entire 30 year experience in the industry (not that I would have heard either version in the last 25 of them, of course :D )

                                          G Offline
                                          G Offline
                                          George Grimes
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #58

                                          To add to the old-timers theory, I started programming in 1976 on my job. The first language was an assembler for a minicomputer and then Fortran. After that, I started to college working on my E.E. degree and they forced me to take one semester each of Basic and Fortran (again). By that time I was learning both Pascal and C at work so my exposure to Basic didn't do me too much harm. You can count me as another programmer (still programming for a living) who did not start with the Basic language. I also never heard A$ pronounced A-string until I read this thread. I also never considered Basic to have given birth to the concept of the terminology. I'll see if I can did out some of my old books and find any references to strings that predate Basic.

                                          K 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups