On Sunday, 30 September 2001 20:01, John Meacham wrote: > sorry for the me too post, but this has been a major pet peeve of mine > for a long time. 16 bit unicode should be gotten rid of, being the worst > of both worlds, non backwards compatable with ascii, endianness issues > and no constant length encoding.... utf8 externally and utf32 when > worknig with individual characters is the way to go.
I totally agree with you. > seeing as how the haskell standard is horribly vauge when it comes to > character set encodings anyway, I would recommend that we just omit any > reference to the bit size of Char, and just say abstractly that each > Char represents one unicode character, but the entire range of unicode > is not guarenteed to be expressable, which must be true, since haskell > 98 implementations can be written now, but unicode can change in the > future. The only range guarenteed to be expressable in any > representation are the values 0-127 US ASCII (or perhaps latin1) This sounds also very good. > John Wolfgang _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
