Email list hosting service & mailing list manager

Re: the "Unicode Background" section Thomas Lord (22 Jul 2005 03:28 UTC)
Surrogates and character representation Tom Emerson (22 Jul 2005 03:55 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation John.Cowan (22 Jul 2005 04:09 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation Tom Emerson (22 Jul 2005 04:26 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation Thomas Bushnell BSG (23 Jul 2005 07:19 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation Tom Emerson (23 Jul 2005 17:38 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation John.Cowan (24 Jul 2005 05:37 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation Shiro Kawai (24 Jul 2005 08:15 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation Tom Emerson (24 Jul 2005 13:25 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation Alan Watson (24 Jul 2005 17:32 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation Tom Emerson (24 Jul 2005 17:54 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation Alan Watson (24 Jul 2005 18:15 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation Tom Emerson (24 Jul 2005 20:18 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation Per Bothner (24 Jul 2005 18:25 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation John.Cowan (24 Jul 2005 23:02 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation Per Bothner (24 Jul 2005 23:26 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation Alan Watson (25 Jul 2005 17:24 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation bear (27 Jul 2005 16:16 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation John.Cowan (24 Jul 2005 22:12 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation Ken Dickey (24 Jul 2005 09:35 UTC)
Re: Surrogates and character representation Michael Sperber (24 Jul 2005 11:47 UTC)
Re: the "Unicode Background" section Matthew Flatt (22 Jul 2005 04:30 UTC)
Re: the "Unicode Background" section Alex Shinn (22 Jul 2005 05:42 UTC)
Re: the "Unicode Background" section bear (22 Jul 2005 15:45 UTC)
Re: the "Unicode Background" section Tom Emerson (22 Jul 2005 15:56 UTC)

Re: Surrogates and character representation Alan Watson 24 Jul 2005 18:14 UTC

Okay, thanks for clearing up my misunderstanding.

 > but in general using UTF-8 as an internal representation is
 > a bad idea.

Using UTF-8 internally for a Scheme on a Plan 9 system is not obviously
a bad idea. Sure, you don't have direct indexing, but you avoid
conversion when you talk to the C library and OS.

Using UTF-16 internally doesn't give you direct indexing because of
characters outside the BMP, but it might make sense on Windows boxes for
precisely the same reason.

Using UCS-32 internally in these cases would involve translation to talk
to the library and OS and would further make my emacs use about four
times as much memory as it does now (which brings us back the the
representation for infinity).

In general, any single representation is a bad idea in some circumstances.

Regards,

Alan
--
Dr Alan Watson
Centro de Radioastronomía y Astrofísica
Universidad Astronómico Nacional de México