On 2006-09-17, Sly Gryphon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think it would be good for darcs to include better support for Unicode.

I think it would be _essential_ for darcs to include better support for
_locales_. But apparently, as the related bug report is still marked as
wont-fix <http://bugs.darcs.net/issue64>, too many of the developers are 
UTF-8 monoculturists, who think that instead of abstraction, UTF-8 should
be the single global standard from which we will be suffering from for ages
to come, just like we're still suffering from the ASCII assumption, the
Latin1 assumption, the Win-Latin1 assumption, the CP437 and CP850 assumptions,
and so on. And UTF-8 is no different. While UTF-8 indeed is quite a neat
mapping from 16/32-bit numbers to 8-bit sequences, the Unicode at the
background is a totally fucked up mess, and it would be nice to see something
better come up. But an UTF-8 monoculture will make it difficult. Some people
have not learned, that assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups.

Mercurial supports locales, and I've seriously been considering making the
switch... it's just that I really like the proper cherry-picking support of
darcs, and would prefer using something with a neat theory behind it, and
not written in a timebomb-typed language. Unfortunately, darcs seems to
concentrate too much on that side, and forget much of the interface side
altogether. (I'm still waiting for ISO-8601 style or locale dates in output
too.) But if nothing happens even to the wont-fix status of locale support,
I'm quite likely to make the switch, one day.

-- 
Tuomo


_______________________________________________
darcs-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.abridgegame.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel

Reply via email to