[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Comparison with Forth equivalent

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 29 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 29 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

> 1.  current-locale:
> ------------------
> Instead of returning a list, Forth provides two words get-language and 
> get-country.  These deal with the ISO codes (e.g. en, de, us, ie), 
> apparently in the equivalent of symbol form (words).
> Note that set-language and set-country are provided also.  Arguably, 
> this is nice for symmetry, but I think it's better to leave locale 
> selection up to the user (e.g. using environment variables).

I think this is reasonable.

> *  I'm worried about performance and/or fitting in with the host OS.  I 
> know almost all software runs "fast enough", but XPG4 implementations 
> can go to some lengths (on-disk hashes mmapped into RAM) for speed.  I 
> would guess that this isn't for nothing.
> Even if nobody does, I'd like to allow implementors the latitude to do 
> something like this, or better, just interface to the system libraries 
> with an FFI.  So I'd suggest defining declare-bundle as a sublanguage, 
> somewhat like SRFI-7.  The sample implementation could remain the same 
> and you could just load these files, but at least people would then be 
> able to use a different scheme, say generating a message catalogue from 
> the source.

I agree wrt giving implementers enough lattitude to 'make it fast'.  If
this could be done relatively simply, and still allow bundles to be
created portably, then great.  I don't think the current SRFI is very 
far from that.


Attachment: pgpn1oKg1YhXr.pgp
Description: PGP signature