At 07:42 PM 1/2/2002 +, Tom Hughes wrote:
>In message <20020102054642$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> "David & Lisa Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Here is a short list of TODOs that I came up with for STRINGs. First, do
> > these look good to people? And second, what is the preferre
In message <20020102054642$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"David & Lisa Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here is a short list of TODOs that I came up with for STRINGs. First, do
> these look good to people? And second, what is the preferred method for
> keeping track of these (patch to the TO
From: "Peter Gibbs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > * Add size of string termination to encodings (i.e., how many 0 bytes)
>
> Should string termination be required? If strings are assumed to be
> terminated, it seems to me that precludes buffer re-use (copy-on-write)
for
> substrings. On the other hand,
- Original Message -
From: "David & Lisa Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * Add transcoding ops (this might be a specific case of the previous e.g.,
> set S0, S1, "unicode", "utf-16")
Note that there is still a bug in string_transcode as of string.c 1.35; I
have repeated a patch below. I t
Here is a short list of TODOs that I came up with for STRINGs. First, do
these look good to people? And second, what is the preferred method for
keeping track of these (patch to the TODO file, entries in bug tracking
system, mailing list, etc.
* Add set ops that are encoding aware (e.g., set S0
