On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 11:49 AM, Tim Brown <tim.br...@cityc.co.uk> wrote:
>
> 1. I think Eli points out in issue where \277 and \276 are not ci=?
> to each other.
No -- my comment there is about \277 and \277 (itself), which are
neither `bytes-ci=?` nor not because the implementation assumes that the
two bytes to compare are both in utf-8 and therefore we get an exception
instead of an answer. The source of the comment is that this was (I
think) at some point in unstable, as a candidate to move to racket/bytes
(hence my comment about the memory requirement, which is relevant in
that context).
[BTW, looking at that SO answer and the RFC it seems to me that latin-1
is wrong too for the values, which should remain opaque...]
--
((x=>x(x))(x=>x(x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
