UniCode
Andrew J Bromage
andrew@bromage.org
Sun, 7 Oct 2001 01:09:26 +1000
G'day all.
On Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 06:17:26PM +0000, Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk wrote:
> This information is out of date. AFAIR about 40000 of them is assigned.
> Most for Chinese (current, not historic).
I wasn't aware of this. Last time I looked was Unicode 3.0. Thanks
for the update.
> In Haskell String = [Char].
I'll concede that String and [Char] are identical as far as the
programmer is concerned. :-)
There was some research 10+ years ago about alternative representations
for lists which were semantically identical but a little more efficient
in memory use. Even if you don't go that far (it is fiddly), constant
strings, for example, could be representable as UTF-16/UTF-8/whatever
along with some machinery to generate the list on demand. Char objects
could be implemented as flyweights. Lots of possibilities.
Cheers,
Andrew Bromage