On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 12:37 AM, Raymond Toy <toy.raym...@gmail.com> wrote:
> (I was surprised to see ecl choose the smallest string type to fit a
> literal string.)
>
Why? I mean, an ordinary unicode string without utf-8 packing takes 4 times
the room of a base string. Since ECL is using a string buffer to read
objects, then why shouldn't it pack them to the smallest representation
when possible?
Juanjo
--
Instituto de Física Fundamental, CSIC
c/ Serrano, 113b, Madrid 28006 (Spain)
http://juanjose.garciaripoll.googlepages.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d
_______________________________________________
Ecls-list mailing list
Ecls-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ecls-list
