On 21 Sep 2009, at 11:43 pm, Andrew Reilly wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 08:49:03AM -0700, Thomas Lord wrote: >> I don't think so. For example, I like the idea >> of using codepoints with buckybits as the names >> of keyboard events. > > Isn't that a fairly gratuitous example of an ad-hoc storage > optimization for a very specific application, and therefore > not much of an argument for putting something into "thing-1"? > (Where do you put the bucky-bits when the input is EBCDIC? > What's the codepoint for "F11"?)
I much prefer representing key events as a list of characters (for actual character events) and symbols (for function keys). 'f11 is then the 'codepoint' for F11 :-) ABS -- Alaric Snell-Pym Work: http://www.snell-systems.co.uk/ Play: http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/alaric/ Blog: http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/archives/author/alaric/ _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
