[Openmcl-devel] Unicode in OpenMCL
Andrew P. Lentvorski, Jr.
bsder at mail.allcaps.org
Wed Jun 23 16:50:21 EDT 2004
On Jun 23, 2004, at 1:00 PM, Gary Byers wrote:
> I think that it would be bad to have EXTENDED-CHAR (basically, bad to
> have more than one type of CHARACTER); it makes more sense to me to
> make all CHARACTERs (BASE-CHARs) and make CHAR-CODE-LIMIT be 2^24
> or so (I think that Unicode 4 needs about 21 bits to natively encode
> any character.)
I can't seem to find it, but I seem to recall a discussion about this
on one of the Lisp Wikis.
The general consensus was that adding Unicode to the basic character
type was a bad idea because ASCII can make certain guarantees that
Unicode cannot. Collation sequence and canonical representation being
the ones I can remember (ie. characters have order and a set of
characters is defined by one and only one bytestream).
I am in favor of some form of Unicode string. However, the notion of a
"character" in Unicode is a very fuzzy thing.
More information about the Openmcl-devel