On 9/9/2013 12:38 PM, Ned Batchelder wrote:
jmf, thanks for your reply. You've calmed my fears that there is
something wrong with the Flexible String Representation. None of the
examples you show demonstrate any behavior contrary to the Unicode spec.
The goals of the new unicode implementation:
1. one implementation on all platforms, working the same on all platforms.
2. works correctly
3. O(1) indexing
4. save as much space as sensibly possible
5. not too much time penalty for the space saving.
The new implementation succeeded on all points. It exceeded the goal for
5. With much optimization work, there essentially is no overall time
penalty left.
Jmf's size examples show success with respect to goal 4. He apparently
disagrees with that goal and would replace it with something else. At
least some of his time examples show that saving space can save time, as
was predicted when the FSR was being developed.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
