On 13 Apr 2004, at 23:43, Dan Sugalski wrote:
I've been assuming it's a left-side wins, as you're tacking onto an existing string, so you'd get English in all cases. Alternately you could get an exception. The end result of a mixed-language operation could certainly be the Dunno language or the current default--both'd be reasonable.
Would I be right in thinking that *language* in the context of Parrot strings is not necessarily an accurate description of the actual language of the string, but rather a means of specifying a particular set of idiosyncratic behavior normally associated with an actual language?
Basically, yes.
Is there ever a situation where the contents of the appended/inserted strings are altered because of the change in *language*? In other words, are there any *language* (as distinct from character set) transforms? And, can new *languages* be defined?
New language code could certainly be defined, yes. I'm not sure you'd see too many explicit transforms from one to another past some sort of initial classification.
For example, will there be a way to define a *language* "toetsch" where 'ro' becomes '0r' in 'b0rken', and 'see' becomes 's.'?
Probably not, no, unless you really wanted to mangle the upcase/downcase/titlecase transformations.
--
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
