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

Re: the discussion so far

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.

Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> If string<? is used only for cases where the exact order is
> irrelevant, then there is no advantage in standardizing the order at
> all.
> So why not say that string<? implements a total order on strings, and
> be done with it, not specifying the order at all?

I can well live with that :-)

        -- Jorgen

PS. It might be worth the effort to try going through this SRFI
and see whether we can change the specific formulations in a way
that allows an implementation to use ASCII if it wants to, but
also allows for a correct implementation of Unicode if so desired.
Correct Unicode behavior could be "optional" the same way as
fraction or complex numbers are optional for the numeric tower
right now.

((email . "forcer@xxxxxxxxx") (www . "http://www.forcix.cx/";)
 (gpg   . "1024D/028AF63C")   (irc . "nick forcer on IRCnet"))