#### [Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 07:45:57PM +0100: Nicholas Clark] > On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 03:09:02PM +0100, Leon Brocard wrote: > > Dan Sugalski sent the following bits through the ether: > > > > > If someone's tempted to do 3) Write our own Unicode system, I'm OK > > > with that too. The string internals doc needs writing, and I can get > > > that done. > > > > IIRC the mono people wrote their own, but with the ICU data files. > > Apart from license issues, this might be an interesting thing to look > > at. > > It would remove the dependency on C++ > But is the amount of effort too much like hard work compared with integrating > 3.0?
For what it's worth, I checked a parrot out for the first time in ages a couple of days ago (the Shub-tuit gives, as the Shub-tuit takes away...), but got all stuck failing to work out how to get icu not to be a problem, and so get something built to play with. I suspect most people are in the same boat, wanting to hack on parrot, and not on icu. So, whatever makes that so, so it should be. Also, by the time parrot's really ready, icu will likely be more advanced, so we'll probably want to include that version, rather than today's, in what gets shipped. Some way to make that easy now probably also solves my apathy. Alex -- COINCIDENCE: You weren't paying attention to the other half of what was going on.
