Talk:str

RFV
"Abbreviation for string in many programming languages." I've seen it as part of longer abbreviations (e.g. substr for substring) but not alone. And a noun? The plural strs: seems dubious. Equinox ◑ 21:30, 10 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Programmers often use str as a string identifier (like using n or i for an integer identifier), but that doesn't quite seem to match our def. And some (many?) dialects of BASIC, as well as Visual Basic, provide a function str/STR (or more properly str$/STR$) that accepts a number and returns a string version, but again, not quite what our def says. Honestly, I'm not sure what would match our def. Is the idea that many programming languages have str and <tt>string</tt> keywords or built-identifiers that are equivalent? Or that many programming languages have <tt>str</tt> keywords or built-identifiers that mean more or less "string", or that are intended to be read aloud as "string"? —Ruakh <i >TALK</i > 23:42, 10 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Cited just about as well as it can be. DAVilla 01:26, 15 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I think one can well argue that the 1993, 2006, and 2009 cites justify a sense, but I don't think they quite justify the challenged sense. Only the 2009 cite is using a <tt>str</tt> that's in a programming language, and none of the cites is using <tt>str</tt> or str in a way that could be replaced with <tt>string</tt> or string (respectively), which means that is not so much an abbreviation of "string" as it is a term formed by abbreviating "string". (That is, its abbreviated nature is just etymological information.) —Ruakh <i >TALK</i > 00:01, 5 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Alright, I've tweaked the definition, and added to encourage further tweaking. (late signature: - -sche (discuss) 00:27, 12 August 2011 (UTC))

Stremmata
Obviously a minor usage that will only get less common with time, but source. — Llywelyn<font color="Gold">II  12:07, 8 April 2015 (UTC)