[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 scripsit:

> I'm referring to all the associate Unicode-related standards as well.
> Please don't standardize non-compliance with other standards.  If a
> Scheme system wants to comply with the UCA, then it should be able to
> do so without violating the Scheme standard.

SRFI-75 in no way prevents that.  It simply says what string<? and its friends
mean.  You can still provide string-uca-simple<? and string-uca-locale<? if
you want.

> I believe that a sufficiently fancy Scheme implementation should be
> allowed to treat canonically equivalent sequences identically.  We
> should not standardize in Scheme a differential treatment here.

Same answer: you can provide string-nfd, string-nfc, string-nfkc, and
string-nfkd if you want, and also the obvious composition of these
functions with string<? and friends.

John Cowan  jcowan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  www.reutershealth.com  www.ccil.org/~cowan
Original line from The Warrior's Apprentice by Lois McMaster Bujold:
"Only on Barrayar would pulling a loaded needler start a stampede toward one."
English-to-Russian-to-English mangling thereof: "Only on Barrayar you risk to
lose support instead of finding it when you threat with the charged weapon."