Alaric Snell-Pym scripsit: > I think it's worth mentioning that if the implementation supports > exciting beyond-ASCII (not just Unicode) digits, their numeric value (as > defined in whatever standard defines the character set, such as the > Unicode numeric value proprety) needs to be supported by the > implementation, for consistency.
AFAIK only Unicode has any concept of the decimal-digit value property, and no other character set supports any digits other than the European (ASCII) set. > I'm ambivalent about digit-value in WG1; certainly it needs to exist in > some form as part of a WG2 "character properties" thingy if it's not in WG1. It will be. See UcdCowan for a proposal. > char-numeric? certainly seems to be of limited use without it, but > is the char-numeric?/digit-value pair actually useful at all in the > scope of WG1, given string->number? Unless we are to extend `string->number` to handle non-European digits (and then `read`, and then numeric literals?), I think so. -- A rose by any other name John Cowan may smell as sweet, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan but if you called it an onion [email protected] you'd get cooks very confused. --RMS _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
