One should remember that the purpose of such an FAQ, from
such a source, is not to survey and report upon anything fundamental
in computer programming but, rather, to guide the rapid commercial
adoption of a standard under highly contingent circumstances.
You know, Steele worked on Java. We're working on Scheme.
This is not to say that Davis' comment isn't a good rule of thumb
or "design pattern". Just that it shouldn't be taken as the last
word on anything.
-t
Jason Orendorff wrote:
> Michael linked to a Unicode FAQ earlier; I want to highlight this:
>
> "Q: How about using UTF-32 interfaces in my APIs?
>
> "A: Except in some environments that store text as UTF-32 in memory,
> most Unicode APIs are using UTF-16. With UTF-16 APIs the low level
> indexing is at the storage or code unit level, with higher-level
> mechanisms for graphemes or words specifying their boundaries in terms
> of the code units. This provides efficiency at the low levels, and the
> required functionality at the high levels."
>
> The author is Mark Davis, President of the Unicode Consortium.
>
> http://unicode.org/faq/utf_bom.html#11
>
> -j
>
> _______________________________________________
> r6rs-discuss mailing list
> r6rs-discuss_at_lists.r6rs.org
> http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
>
Received on Fri Mar 23 2007 - 23:17:32 UTC