Re: Unicode support (Re: macho 0.4 released)

On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 15:43, Klaus Weidner wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 03:15:08PM -0800, Miles Egan wrote:
> > So what is the status of Unicode support in CL?  Is it purely up to the
> > implementation?  The string handling functions seems to be abstracted
> > over character type but I don't see anything in the hyperspec explicitly
> > about Unicode.
> 
> There are basically two approaches:
> 
> * use plain octet strings containing UTF-8 encoded character streams.
> * use wide characters internally, and convert input and output.

At this point this is sounding gross enough that I think I'm going to
wait to deal with it until there's some real demand for it.  It sounds
like I can fix the author lines without spending too much time on this
problem and I think I'll defer full unicode support to the day that
either someone sends me patches or I get a lot of requests from people
that actually want to deploy macho but can't because of this issue.

Thanks for all the responses though.

-- 
Miles Egan <[email protected]>

_______________________________________________
Clump mailing list
[email protected]
http://manly.caddr.com/mailman/listinfo/clump

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQA/sQuZU4Jq/wH1PVERAvN3AKDb6WOTLJN6NNU2eZiZQywlk0wKkQCfcpCs
f8PcLU8NZzrLd+x+Nm1mpaA=
=44Fq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----