Thomas Lord wrote:
> You didn't quote the part where they talk about making room for
> expansion to
> international character sets.
Since they haven't done so, perhaps it isn't all that easy.
> Anyway, your point is apparently that, in your view, MIT Scheme 7.5.5
> can't be turned
> into R6 compliance without removing bucky-bit support,
Probably, the way 5.92 is written. I don't care if R6RS is changed
to be more liberal in terms of allowing other character sets.
Supporting Unicode *and* bucky bits is possible, but the only sane
reason to do so would be to support legacy code. And even then
you'd want to seriously consider removing the bucky bits (mis-)feature.
> which I will venture
> a guess, will reek havoc with edwin, for example.
If Edwin is to support Unicode I suspect major work is going to
be needed anyway. Is Edwin still being maintained? Or used?
--
--Per Bothner
per_at_bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/
Received on Mon Mar 19 2007 - 15:47:08 UTC