On 11/15/2010 10:10 AM, Alexander Klenin wrote:
Actually, I do not think so. I believe that an integer containing the codepoint
is preferable implementation.
OK, Unicode always blows up the complexity of the code greatly ;).
Your suggestion would result in an UTF-8 -> UCS32 translation and thus force
Either way, of course, the quadratic complexity
of for..to loop remains.
I don't thinks so. see the other mail regarding implementing a hidden
loop pointer and a published loop variable (e.g. as an UTF-8 string).
-Michael
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
