Greg Stein wrote: [MAL:] > > The downside of using UTF16: it is a variable length format, > > so iterations over it will be slower than for UCS4. > > Bzzt. May as well go with UTF-8 as the internal format, much like Perl > is doing (as I recall). Ehm, pardon me for asking - what is the brief rationale for selecting UCS2/4, or whetever it ends up being, over UTF8? I couldn't find a discussion in the last months of the string SIG, was this decided upon and frozen long ago? I'm not trying to re-open a can of worms, just to understand. -- Jean-Claude
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4