G'day all. On Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 06:17:26PM +0000, Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk wrote:
> This information is out of date. AFAIR about 40000 of them is assigned. > Most for Chinese (current, not historic). I wasn't aware of this. Last time I looked was Unicode 3.0. Thanks for the update. > In Haskell String = [Char]. I'll concede that String and [Char] are identical as far as the programmer is concerned. :-) There was some research 10+ years ago about alternative representations for lists which were semantically identical but a little more efficient in memory use. Even if you don't go that far (it is fiddly), constant strings, for example, could be representable as UTF-16/UTF-8/whatever along with some machinery to generate the list on demand. Char objects could be implemented as flyweights. Lots of possibilities. Cheers, Andrew Bromage _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users