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

Re: Surrogates and character representation

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 75 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 75 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

Tom Emerson:
> Surrogate codepoints have a character property. They should be usable
> in a string, and individually can be considered a character. 

Thomas Bushnell:
> This is exactly part of the reason why char=codepoint is such a lose.

Nah..... because:

> Most code doesn't *want* to see this kind of garbage; 

Nobody disagrees.

> it's an encoding
> issue.  

Everybody agrees.

> I want chars where the *computer* takes care of the coding.  I
> want chars that are fully-understood characters, not little pieces of
> a character.

Hopefully, since it's not clear exactly how to give you what 
you want, R6RS will give you an environment in which you can
elaborate that idea in a portable way, propose it as standard,
and have lots of implementors try it out in their implementation
to see how they feel about it.