[Tim, wonders why Perl and Tcl went w/ UTF-8 internally] [Greg Stein] > Probably for the exact reason that you stated in your messages: many > 8-bit (7-bit?) functions continue to work quite well when given a > UTF-8-encoded string. i.e. they didn't have to rewrite the entire > Perl/TCL interpreter to deal with a new string type. > > I'd guess it is a helluva lot easier for us to add a Python Type than > for Perl or TCL to whack around with new string types (since they use > strings so heavily). Sounds convincing to me! Bumped into an old thread on c.l.p.m. that suggested Perl was also worried about UCS-2's 64K code point limit. But I'm already on record as predicting we'll regret any decision <wink>.
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