Re: so... string work

    > From: Matthew Dempsky <[email protected]>

    > Hm, I guess I should move the core scaffolding I've written into
    > strings-reps.[ch] then... (I was thinking at first strings would
    > suffice as a purely libscm type, but I guess not.)

Construction and locking of strings definately goes in reps/.

Extraction definately goes in libscm/.

That strings are vtable objects is probably a reps/ issue.

Standard procedures (e.g., STRING-LENGTH) should be in libscm.

Sound about right?

(That's not a rhetorical question, just a hint about what I think --
you're the one fussing with the details of it.)

-t