Scheme language standardization process
On Wed, 2014-07-02 at 08:04 -0700, Per Bothner wrote: > In other words: Supporting string-replace! has no extra overheads beyond > requiring an "indirect" representation. The latter is forced anyway if > you support mutability and full Unicode, unless you use 3- or 4-byte characters. > Even if you do use 3- or 4-byte characters, indirection is worth it, because > mutable fixed-size strings is an essentially-useless feature. Are there any extant examples of 3-byte code units in strings? I would find that - interesting. Bear _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list Scheme-reports@x http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports