Subject: Re: [SG16-Unicode] code_unit_sequence and code_point_sequence
From: Mark Zeren (mzeren_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-06-19 13:45:03
ï»¿On 6/19/18, 11:10 AM, "unicode-bounces_at_[hidden] on behalf of Lyberta" <unicode-bounces_at_[hidden] on behalf of lyberta_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> [mjz] This is one approach. Another is Zach's opinionated "there is only one storage container" approach.
Zach's approach is exactly what I don't want to see in the standard. His
type only supports UTF-8.
[mjz] Completely understood. I'm making the rhetorical point that there are other positions. Most (all?) "competing" language runtimes have chosen "one true string storage class". Even with the current standard libaray C++ std::string (the particular instantiation) is a defacto vocabulary type, and other instantiations are vanishingly rare. Again, this is partly rhetorical, but also you never know these things until you start debating and polling.
SG16 list run by email@example.com