> Faster ok, privided this does not break other uses, notably for  random 
> access within strings…

Either way, this is a “recommendation”.  I don’t see how that can provide for 
not-“breaking other uses.”  If it’s internal, you can do what you will, so if 
you need the 1:1 seeming parity, then you can do that internally.  But if 
you’re depending on other APIs/libraries/data source/whatever, it would seem 
like you couldn’t count on that.  (And probably shouldn’t even if it was a 
requirement rather than a recommendation).

I’m wary of the idea of attempting random access on a stream that is also 
manipulating the stream at the same time (decoding apparently).

The U+FFFD emitted by this decoding could also require a different # of bytes 
to reencode.  Which might disrupt the presumed parity, depending on how the 
data access was being handled.

-Shawn

Reply via email to