On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 07:28 -0800, John Meacham wrote: > On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 01:34:54PM +0000, Duncan Coutts wrote: > > Personally I'm not really fussed about which compromise we pick. I think > > the more important point is that all the Haskell implementations pick > > the same compromise so that we can effectively standardise the > > behaviour. > > Wait, are you talking about changing what ghc does or trying to change > the haskell standard? I always thought ghc should do something more sane > with character IO, non unicode aware programs are a blight. > > I don't think choosing something arbitrary to standardize on is a good > idea. It is not always clear what the best choice is. like, for instance > until recently, jhc used locale encoding on linux, due to glibc's strong > charset support and guarenteed use of unicode wchar_t's, but utf8 always > on bsd-varients, where the wchar_t situation was less clear cut. On > embedded systems, only supporting ASCII IO is certainly a valid choice. > For a .NET backend, we will want to use .NET's native character IO > routines.
Oh I wasn't trying to pin it down that much. If you want to use ebdic on some embedded platform by default I don't care. I really mean that it'd be nice if hugs, ghc, jhcm nhc98 etc could agree for each of the major platforms, Linux/Unix, OS X and Windows. And I don't mean necessarily that they should do the same thing across platforms (eg as I understand it OS X would always use UTF8 not a variable locale) just that they should do the same on the same platform. So not a change of the H98 spec, just a common consensus on the major platforms. Duncan _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users