On Wed, 10 Nov 1999, Jean-Claude Wippler wrote: > Greg Stein wrote: > > 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? Try sometime last year :-) ... something like July thru September as I recall. Things will be a lot faster if we have a fixed-size character. Variable length formats like UTF-8 are a lot harder to slice, search, etc. Also, (IMO) a big reason for this new type is for interaction with the underlying OS/platform. I don't know of any platforms right now that really use UTF-8 as their Unicode string representation (meaning we'd have to convert back/forth from our UTF-8 representation to talk to the OS). Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
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