[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg
From: |
John Cowan |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg |
Date: |
Tue, 18 Mar 2008 23:56:48 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) |
Shawn Rutledge scripsit:
> But you would want the usual string operations to work with either
> kind of string, right?
Indeed.
> It could follow from the general principle of separating metadata from
> data: Put the encoding in the extended attributes of the file, or
> resource fork if you've got one.
Specifically, the 8-BOM interferes with the ability of ASCII-aware but
8-bit clean programs to treat UTF-8 the same as ASCII. When they expect
to see something specific (like #!) at the beginning, they see the 8-BOM
instead and barf.
I'm all in favor of the 16-BOM, where there are no such issues, and
it also serves to reliably flag UTF-16/UCS-2 and to allow for variable
endianism. Same with the 32-BOM, if anyone bothers to use UTF-32 for
interchange.
> I thought it was still a reasonable assumption most of the time,
Except when it isn't. ASCII is a reasonable assumption most of the time,
except when it isn't.
> Or have 4 types of strings: byte (restricted strings), UTF-8, and
> fixed-char-size 16- and 24-bit strings.
Check out http://larceny.ccs.neu.edu/larceny-trac/wiki/StringRepresentations ,
then let's talk, if there's anything left to talk about. :-)
--
We are lost, lost. No name, no business, no Precious, nothing. Only empty.
Only hungry: yes, we are hungry. A few little fishes, nassty bony little
fishes, for a poor creature, and they say death. So wise they are; so just,
so very just. --Gollum address@hidden http://ccil.org/~cowan
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, (continued)
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, John Cowan, 2008/03/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Alex Shinn, 2008/03/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, John Cowan, 2008/03/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Tobia Conforto, 2008/03/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, John Cowan, 2008/03/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Tobia Conforto, 2008/03/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, John Cowan, 2008/03/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Shawn Rutledge, 2008/03/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, John Cowan, 2008/03/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Shawn Rutledge, 2008/03/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg,
John Cowan <=
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Graham Fawcett, 2008/03/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, John Cowan, 2008/03/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Alex Shinn, 2008/03/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, felix winkelmann, 2008/03/19
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, John Cowan, 2008/03/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Tobia Conforto, 2008/03/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, John Cowan, 2008/03/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Alaric Snell-Pym, 2008/03/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, John Cowan, 2008/03/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Graham Fawcett, 2008/03/18