Alex Shinn scripsit:
The clean way to handle this is to duplicate the useful string
APIs for bytevectors. This could be done without code duplication
with the use of functors, though compiler assistance may be
needed for efficiency (e.g. for inlined procedures). Even without
code
Alex Shinn scripsit:
Hmmm... that's upsetting. Python 3 is a notorious dead-end language.
That's a premature judgment (and rather Google-centric). Since Python
3.0 was DOA, the intended five-year transition plan to Python 3 by
default ended only a month ago (Python 3.1 was released in June
Yaroslav Tsarko scripsit:
Why don`t just add *(use utf8)* line explicitly to all the eggs that
handle strings? That will ultimately fix the problem
and will clearly indicate that egg performs string manipulations and
is capable of handling UTF-8 encoding.
That will certainly work, but has an
On 09.07.2014 02:15, Oleg Kolosov wrote:
IMO just enable utf8 by default and let them break. Is it's not 80's
anymore, latin1 only software should die.
+ 1.
For specific use cases (backward compatibility, logging or minimizing
runtime size for example) it should be possible to disable
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 7:00 AM, Alex Shinn alexsh...@gmail.com wrote:
However, I don't think that's the real problem. The issue as I
understand is that although Chicken has both strings and
bytevectors in the core, historically and for continued simplicity
strings are abused as bytevectors
On 07/09/14 09:00, Alex Shinn wrote:
However, I don't think that's the real problem. The issue as I
understand is that although Chicken has both strings and
bytevectors in the core, historically and for continued simplicity
strings are abused as bytevectors in many cases. ...
And this is a
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 7:20 AM, Oleg Kolosov bazur...@gmail.com wrote:
On 07/09/14 09:00, Alex Shinn wrote:
The clean way to handle this is to duplicate the useful string
APIs for bytevectors. This could be done without code duplication
with the use of functors, though compiler
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Michele La Monaca
mikele.chic...@lamonaca.net wrote:
Wouldn't be simpler and more effective this other path?
1) keep current string functions as they are (i.e. byte-oriented) and
keep abusers abusing (and happy)
2) provide new utf8/cursor-oriented functions
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 7:15 AM, Oleg Kolosov bazur...@gmail.com wrote:
IMO just enable utf8 by default and let them break. Is it's not 80's
anymore, latin1 only software should die.
I agree that if people want latin1 only there should at best be
a compiler option for this which is disabled
Hi,
On Tue, 08 Jul 2014 08:57:43 +0400 Yaroslav Tsarko eriktsa...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Why don`t just add (use utf8) line explicitly to all the eggs that
handle strings? That will ultimately fix the problem and will clearly
indicate that egg performs string manipulations and is capable of
Hi,
On 08.07.2014 16:40, Mario Domenech Goulart wrote:
On the other hand, we risk breaking eggs that operate on latin1 text.
UTF-8 support may also affect performance-sensitive code. Best wishes.
Mario
Isn`t UTF-8 backward-compatible with Latin-1 and ASCII encodings? AFAIR
UTF-8 is the
Hi Alex,
On Tue, 8 Jul 2014 12:42:21 +0900 Alex Shinn alexsh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 5:58 AM, Mario Domenech Goulart
mario.goul...@gmail.com wrote:
I want to use some eggs and I need them to handle UTF-8. By
handle UTF-8 I mean treat strings as UTF-8, so that
On Tue, 08 Jul 2014 17:27:27 +0400 Yaroslav Tsarko eriktsa...@googlemail.com
wrote:
On 08.07.2014 16:40, Mario Domenech Goulart wrote:
On the other hand, we risk breaking eggs that operate on latin1
text. UTF-8 support may also affect performance-sensitive code.
Isn`t UTF-8
Hi,
On 08.07.2014 18:03, Mario Domenech Goulart wrote:
They are compatible only in the 7-bit ASCII range. The remaining bit
in the byte makes the whole difference. :-) In UTF-8 it means either
here's your 8-bit character or look at the next byte. In latin1 it
always means here's your 8-bit
On 07/08/14 16:40, Mario Domenech Goulart wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 08 Jul 2014 08:57:43 +0400 Yaroslav Tsarko
eriktsa...@googlemail.com wrote:
Why don`t just add (use utf8) line explicitly to all the eggs that
handle strings? That will ultimately fix the problem and will clearly
indicate that
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 11:00 PM, Mario Domenech Goulart
mario.goul...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, 8 Jul 2014 12:42:21 +0900 Alex Shinn alexsh...@gmail.com wrote:
4. Make affected eggs functors on the set of basic string operations.
Wouldn't 4 be an implementation method of 2?
Yes.
--
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 5:58 AM, Mario Domenech Goulart
mario.goul...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I want to use some eggs and I need them to handle UTF-8. By handle
UTF-8 I mean treat strings as UTF-8, so that
(string (string-ref ç 0)) = ç
for example.
CHICKEN's string-related
Alex Shinn scripsit:
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 5:58 AM, Mario Domenech Goulart
mario.goul...@gmail.com wrote:
It might help the discussion if we had a list of eggs which
are known to break on UTF-8 inputs.
Indeed.
1. Have egg and egg-utf8 variants. Or, more generally, egg and
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 12:59 PM, John Cowan co...@mercury.ccil.org wrote:
The same approaches also apply to eggs needing the full
numeric tower, though with UTF-8 there's less chance of
breakage when mixing eggs which do and don't use the utf8 egg.
I would say that UTF-8 has *more*
Hi,
On 08.07.2014 00:58, Mario Domenech Goulart wrote:
To properly handle UTF-8, we have the utf8 egg. If I understand
correctly, the only way for eggs to properly support UTF-8 is by using
the utf8 egg (or an equivalent implementation).
Best wishes.
Mario
Why don`t just add *(use utf8)*
20 matches
Mail list logo
