> Integer data types are generically referred to as C<INT>s. There is an
> C<INT> typedef that is guaranteed to hold any integer type.
Does such thing exist? Unless it is BIGINT.
> Should we scrap the buffer pointer and just tack the buffer on the end
> of the structure? Saves a level of indirection, but means if we need
> to make the buffer bigger we have to adjust anything pointing to it.
It largely depends on whether these primitive types are mutable or
immutable. Most languages chose immutable, such as Python or Smalltalk.
I assume Perl will choose mutable semantics.
> Floating point data types are generically reffered to as
> C<NUM>s. There is a C<NUM> typedef that is guaranteed to hold any
> floating point data type.
Can you clarify this? The __float80 on x86 has very bad alignment,
and not all compilers support it.
> =item BINARY (0)
>
> =item ASCII (1)
>
> =item EBCDIC (2)
>
> =item UTF_8 (3)
>
> =item UTF_32 (4)
>
> =item NATIVE_1 (5) through NATIVE_3 (7)
Why not to include UTF-16?
Hong
