On 3/14/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's possible that I misunderstand you, but I think we're on the same page. I'm also concerned that R6RS, as currently written, seems to require UCS-4/UTF-32 strings. The problem is that string-ref returns characters, and characters can't be surrogates. Given that Windows, Mac, Java, and IBM's ICU all use UTF-16, that would be a Bad Thing. In fact, my position would be even more extreme: I lament the loss of single/multi byte strings in general (which would include UTF-8). They're still useful for low-level work. In fact, they'll still be needed--think of the various Scheme to C compilers, for example, that will need a char equivalent--they just won't be standardized anymore.
Is there any reason why bytevectors will not fill the need for single-byte strings? --Jeff _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
