On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 21:49 +0400, . wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Why do we need substring [1]? We already have string-copy which looks
> similar to me.
> (These functions take different number of arguments, but string-copy
> can handle this because it's more generic.)
>
> Is this connected with compatabili
"." writes:
> Hi,
>
> Why do we need substring [1]? We already have string-copy which looks
> similar to me.
> (These functions take different number of arguments, but string-copy
> can handle this because it's more generic.)
>
> Is this connected with compatability, convenience or something else
>
>Hi,
>
>Why do we need substring [1]? We already have string-copy which looks
>similar to me.
>(These functions take different number of arguments, but string-copy
>can handle this because it's more generic.)
I haven't looked at the code lately, but, it used to be that substring
would allow yo
