On 2014-04-11, 22:57 , "Faré" <fah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Antoniotti Marco ><antoniotti.ma...@disco.unimib.it> wrote: >> I understand that my original message was not on spot. In fact I >>changed the subject line in my responseŠ The issue, in any case, >>appears to be the handling of characters nevertheless. Maybe Paul can >>clarify what he was really trying to do. >> >> In any caseŠ I am the only person who thinks that a ³sub-standard² on >>these issues may be a Good Thing? >> >For basic survival, ASDF since 2.21 has support for encodings, and >asdf::*utf-8-external-format* (now exported by uiop) will let you >portably handle utf-8 streams (falling back to :default on 8-bit >implementations). UCS-2 and UTF-16 are not universally supported, but >asdf-encodings can help you find your implementation's external-format >for them if available. Or for portable behavior reimplementing things >the hard way, you could use either cl-unicode and flexi-streams, or >babel and streams of (unsigned-byte 8). I am aware of all the things ³out there², and yet, having a number of libraries or even a single library is not the same as ³having a standard². >If you can't convince the community to choose between babel and >cl-unicode and whichever other alternatives may exist, what makes you >think you can get yet another incompatible standard widely adopted? >https://xkcd.com/927/ I am not advocating the proverbial 15th incompatible standard. Since by now people should know what they are doing, it would be nicer to have a document that summarized things up. Didn¹t the ANSI spec essentially came about in that way? >PS: all implementations that accept unicode accept :external-format >:utf-8... except clisp, that requires you to use 'charset:utf-8. If >you want to work towards a common external-format, start here I said ³any takers?². I am just the customer telling the market what it would be nice to have :) and that is the reason why I will not build the 15th ³standard² (or the next library external encoding library). The question I am posing to the authors of the libraries you mentioned is why they don¹t sit down and write such a summary collaborative document and agree on a common interface. Of course the usual responses may be put forth (time, money or both) so my request may be moot. I am aware of that. And yet, why not asking? Cheers ‹ MA P.S. Networking anybody? Multiprocessing? _______________________________________________ pro mailing list pro@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro