On Mar 19, 2007, at 9:04 PM, John Cowan wrote:
William D Clinger scripsit:
Finally, I'd like to note that the current draft R6RS
does not actually preclude bucky bits. An implementation
could add bucky bits to characters while making those
bits invisible to all of the standard operations on
characters and strings.
By the same token, one might add property lists to symbols,
or for that matter add property lists to characters.
I believe that's correct (and can be done portably using hash
tables, though maybe not as efficiently). But I'm not seeing
how this is connected to the issue of ports, characters,
string, and unicode.
Aziz,,,
_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
