On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 11:49 AM, Tim Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> 1. I think Eli points out in issue where \277 and \276 are not ci=?
> to each other.
No -- my comment there is about \277 and \277 (itself), which are
neither `bytes-ci=?` nor not because the implementation assumes that the
two bytes to compare are both in utf-8 and therefore we get an exception
instead of an answer. The source of the comment is that this was (I
think) at some point in unstable, as a candidate to move to racket/bytes
(hence my comment about the memory requirement, which is relevant in
that context).
[BTW, looking at that SO answer and the RFC it seems to me that latin-1
is wrong too for the values, which should remain opaque...]
--
((x=>x(x))(x=>x(x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
