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.
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, Matthew Flatt wrote: >At Mon, 11 Jul 2005 19:14:07 -0700 (PDT), bear wrote: >> Second, I see no point in limiting the representation of unicode >> characters to 2, 4, or 8 hexadecimal digits. > >The reason is to match existing string syntaxes, as taken up an another >thread. But permitting representations of 2, 4, or 8 hex digits is enough to match existing string syntaxes; banning 1, 3, 5, and 6 digit representations seems unnecessary and counterintuitive. Plus, I think 7 and 8 digit representations are both unexpected and completely useless given the limited range of the character set, but if people are actually using them, fine. Otherwise, i'd recommend stating that "it is an error to" use a 7-or-more digit representation. Bear