Unpaired surrogate handling
Shiro Kawai
(26 Jan 2020 00:59 UTC)
|
Re: Unpaired surrogate handling
John Cowan
(26 Jan 2020 02:25 UTC)
|
Re: Unpaired surrogate handling
Shiro Kawai
(26 Jan 2020 03:16 UTC)
|
Re: Unpaired surrogate handling
Amirouche Boubekki
(03 Feb 2020 11:13 UTC)
|
Re: Unpaired surrogate handling
John Cowan
(05 Feb 2020 23:49 UTC)
|
Re: Unpaired surrogate handling Lassi Kortela (07 Feb 2020 15:42 UTC)
|
Re: Unpaired surrogate handling
John Cowan
(07 Feb 2020 15:46 UTC)
|
json-read vs json-fold
Lassi Kortela
(07 Feb 2020 15:52 UTC)
|
Re: json-read vs json-fold
Amirouche Boubekki
(07 Feb 2020 17:27 UTC)
|
Re: json-read vs json-fold
John Cowan
(11 Feb 2020 21:43 UTC)
|
Re: json-read vs json-fold
Amirouche Boubekki
(11 Feb 2020 21:49 UTC)
|
Re: json-read vs json-fold
John Cowan
(11 Feb 2020 22:26 UTC)
|
> I think therefore that the Right Thing to do with an unpaired surrogate, > since it is not possible to represent it as as a Scheme character, is to > raise an exception. Alternatively, there could be an argument whose > value is either the symbol `raise` or the symbol `replace`. In the > latter case, an unpaired surrogate could be converted to #\uFFFD. Can we raise a continuable exception that gets the invalid string or bytevector, and can return the string (or other object) to use instead?