At 12:58 AM 10/10/2001 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 09, 2001 at 10:37:22AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > On the other hand, I'd really, *really* rather not have Unicode
> > constants in anything other than UTF-32
>
>That's a bizarre decision; I'm sure you mean UCS-4 by that.
Nope, I meant UTF-32. I might've been *wrong*, mind, but that's a separate
issue. :) UTF-32 is, by my reading of the Unicode standard and annexes, the
32-bit fixed length encoding for Unicode code points.
> > A should be the prefix for US-ASCII characters.
>
>I really want strnative to be more neutral than US-ASCII.
strnative's the native encoding, right? It shouldn't be US-ASCII by
default, particularly, at least not for everyone. (Does anyone handy have
an 8-bit set that's not US ASCII as their default character set? Though I
suppose a 16-bit set like Shift-JIS would be even better...) I wasn't
proposing it as a default so much as an LCD. If we've a C compiler and the
Parrot source then *something* has to be able to handle 7-bit ASCII data.
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
