On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 9:04 PM, Roland Averkamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Out of curiosity, plain-odbc seems to use strings a lot, I would >> assume that foreign string encoding support would be useful for your >> library. Am I wrong? >> > You are right, currently this handled in rather simple way. > It is assumed that every string is encoded in the native character set. > So maybe I should have a look. It's not possible in CL to tell how strings are encoded. Your library is just using CFFI's default foreign encoding (iso-8859-1 in past versions of CFFI, utf-8 as of 0.10.0). > How about wrapping iconv with CFFI? :-) Ok, just another library .... That might be a useful addition to Babel. > I do not think Alexandria is useful. > Are rotate, shuffle, or random-elt needed? I've implemented and used random-elt a couple of times in the past, FWIW. > Do you really need make-gensym-list, symbolicate (=(intern (format nil "...." > ..) ? IMHO, those (and others) make the code clearer. YMMV, of course. Assuming that you find at least some of Alexandria's utilities useful -- say PARSE-BODY -- consider that while these are typically short pieces of code, many deal with subtle details that can go wrong. Getting these from a library that includes a test suite and is shared/used/reviewed by many other programmers sounds like a good idea to me. To be honest, I'm surprised you haven't complained about trivial-features yet. :-) -- Luís Oliveira http://student.dei.uc.pt/~lmoliv/ _______________________________________________ cffi-devel mailing list cffi-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cffi-devel
