On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 5:46 AM, Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Simon Cozens wrote: > > I think I've finished doing what I can with > > docs/pdds/draft/pdd28_character_sets.pod for the time being. > > Please have a look at it, and let me know if there's anything wrong, > > anything unclear, anything missing or anything objectionable about it > > Warnock Warnock Warnock. Can I get a witness, even if it's "Looks good > but I don't understand it" or "Good luck, pal, but who do you think's > going to implement it?"? > > -- > <Twofish> Pokemon seems an evil concept. Kid hunts animals, and takes > them from the wild into captivity, where he trains them to fight, and > then fights them to the death against other people's pokemon. Doesn't > this remind you of say, cock fighting? > >
I am still trying to digest it, here are some questions on top of James's. - Which language targeting parrot requires graphemes? You say, "A grapheme is our concept.", but then say, "Parrot must support languages which manipulate strings grapheme-by-grapheme" ... but if it's our own concept, surely there aren't any languages that can be forcing us to require it. - Can we get some discussion of the scope of the grapheme table entries? Is this for a single running instance of parrot? How can multiple running copies of parrot share strings if they have different grapheme table entries? How does this impact bytecode generation? freeze/thaw? What happens when someone constructs a string that blows the table size? - Instead of saying "This PDD assumes for the moment that the current string functions will on the whole be maintained", I would much rather see the the current API included in the document and reviewed as part of the design. (Or point to another PDD that contains this API) - In the same vein, I would also be curious to see a gap analysis (not as part of this document); what is the scope of change to meet the goals in the PDD? I may have more questions in the coming days. Thanks for tackling this, Simon. -- Will "Coke" Coleda
