> Deciding betweene two distinct types &str and &string (not mut &string) for your function's interface is nonsense. There's really no decision to be made.If y

> Deciding betweene two distinct types &str and &string (not mut &string) for your function's interface is nonsense. There's really no decision to be made.If you don't want to mutate the argument, use &str, you can still call the function with an &String. If you need mutation, take ownership with String or a mutable ref with &mut String. > Additionally, that dereferencing a string returns a pointer... You can't deref a String, you can only deref a reference (&String), not an object. &String derefs to &str. String.str_method() where str_method takes &str works because it'll auto-ref String -> &String, and then deref to &str. IMO you're making a mountain out of a molehill, it makes a lot of sense once you use it for any time at all.