[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: Tobia Conforto
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 15:52:13 +0100

John Cowan wrote:
Tobia Conforto scripsit:
This is more or less how other languages, such as Python, solved the issue. Two kinds of strings, byte and unicode, and overloading a few string operations to have a slightly different meaning when called on either, computing byte length vs. character length.

And Python 3.0 is ditching this solution in favor of byte strings and Unicode strings instead, because it's unworkable in the long run. In Py3k, you'll write b"..." for a byte string and "..." for a Unicode string; u"..." will be a deprecated synonym. Python 2.6, the bridge release, will support b"..." to assist transition.

So they're ditching {"byte", u"unicode"} strings in favor of {b"byte", "unicode"} ones? What are they ditching exactly? It seems to me they're just switching the default.

Graham Fawcett wrote:
I agree 100% that Unicode support should be core. And on that note I'll stop muddying the waters and give my +1 to copying utf8 into the core and adding a suite of byte- functions.

+1 best solution overall


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]