Browse thread
[Caml-list] possible typechecker bug
-
Fernando Alegre
-
malc
-
Fernando Alegre
-
Julien Signoles
-
Mattias Waldau
- Benjamin Geer
- skaller
- Ville-Pertti Keinonen
- Richard Jones
- kknowles@u...
-
Mattias Waldau
-
Julien Signoles
-
Fernando Alegre
-
malc
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Ville-Pertti Keinonen <will@e...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Commercial application written in O'Caml: ExcelEverywhere |
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 10:01:15AM +0200, Mattias Waldau wrote: > Disadvantage > - 8-bits strings. > UNICODE is needed and the standard for .NET, Java, Ruby... 8-bit strings can be used to represent Unicode just fine. Better, in fact, than the 16-bit wide characters found in some places, since they support encoding up to 31 bits per character and don't have byte order issues. And for places where you need O(1) indexing, a suitable Bigarray (or even just an int array) can be used as an alternate string representation. I think Unicode support should be a matter of library functionality, not native string representation. There is at least one Unicode library available for OCaml (camomile.sourceforge.net). ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners