On Fri, Nov 28, 2003 at 09:21:50PM +, Glynn Clements wrote:
> What Unicode support?
>
> Simply claiming that values of type Char are Unicode characters
> doesn't make it so.
>
> Actually supporting Unicode would require re-implementing toUpper,
> toLower and the is* functions, as well as at l
Glynn Clements wrote:
What Unicode support?
Simply claiming that values of type Char are Unicode characters
doesn't make it so.
Just because some implementations lack toUpper etc. doesn't mean
they all do. Hbc has had those implemented for maybe 10 years.
-- Lennart
__
Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
> > > As a matter of pure speculation, how big an impact would it have if, in
> > > the next "version" of Haskell, Strings were represented as opaque types
> > > with appropriate functions to convert to and from [Char]? Would there be
> > > rioting in the streets?
> >
> >
> > For me, there would rather be celebration :), especially if these could be
> > tuned to only use 8 bits.
>
> What do you mean with this? Hopefully, not dropping Unicode support because
> this would be a very bad idea, IMHO.
I mean to have the option of using Unicode or plain 8bit ascii as yo
Am Freitag, 28. November 2003 19:21 schrieb Hal Daume III:
> > As a matter of pure speculation, how big an impact would it have if, in
> > the next "version" of Haskell, Strings were represented as opaque types
> > with appropriate functions to convert to and from [Char]? Would there be
> > riotin
> As a matter of pure speculation, how big an impact would it have if, in
> the next "version" of Haskell, Strings were represented as opaque types
> with appropriate functions to convert to and from [Char]? Would there be
> rioting in the streets?
For me, there would rather be celebration :), es
On Fri, Nov 28, 2003 at 12:37:30PM +0100, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
> >
> > So, what is happening that there is 1 cell in the heap
> > containing the representation of 'a', and then a linked list
> > of length 500, where each element points to that cell.
>
> Yes, you're right. But if you choose
On Fri, Nov 28, 2003 at 11:31:51AM +0100, Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
> > On my machine "replicate 500 'a'" will use 90MB of space!
>
> You have to take into account that Chars (in GHC) take 4 bytes of memory
> because they denote Unicode codepoints. 5,000,000 times 4 bytes is already 20
> M
Am Freitag, 28. November 2003 12:10 schrieb Koen Claessen:
> Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
> | > 1. Today I spend a few hours trying to track down a memory leak. It
> | > turns out I just didn't realize how much space a string takes up.
> | > On my machine "replicate 500 'a'" will use 90
Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
| > 1. Today I spend a few hours trying to track down a memory leak. It
| > turns out I just didn't realize how much space a string takes up.
| > On my machine "replicate 500 'a'" will use 90MB of space!
|
| You have to take into account that Chars (in GH
Am Freitag, 28. November 2003 04:32 schrieb Ben Escoto:
>Hi, can someone tell me why Haskell strings are linked lists?
I think they are lists because there is already good support for lists in
Haskell. You can just take the many list functions and apply them directly to
strings.
You could then
John Meacham wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
As a matter of pure speculation, how big an impact would it have if, in
the next "version" of Haskell, Strings were represented as opaque types
with appropriate functions to convert to and from [Char]? Would there be
rioting in the streets?
I also h
On Thu, Nov 27, 2003 at 10:54:11PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> OK, to be fair, it does make string-to-string operations a bit more
> convenient. Apart from undergraduate homework exercises and some
> specific domains, though, this isn't exactly the "common case" of
> all situations where peo
13 matches
Mail list logo
