[R6RS] draft Unicode SRFI

Matthew Flatt mflatt
Fri Jul 8 10:29:22 EDT 2005

At Wed, 6 Jul 2005 09:53:00 -0400, Marc Feeley wrote:
> I'm beginning to wonder if it is a good idea to put the locale  
> specific string procedures in the language.  The runtime system will  
> be larger (in binary code size and in various tables) and we don't  
> seem to be able to pin down a definition of what a "locale" is and  
> how the locale is specified to the runtime system.  I think that,  
> given the support in R6RS for Unicode strings, all the locale  
> dependent string operations can be written portably and placed in a  
> "locale" library.  Wouldn't this make more sense?


I had in mind that an implementation might support only a locale that
makes all locale-sensitive operations the same as the
locale-insensitive ones. In general, locale-specific operations adapt
well to approximations (except for the encoding), and I'd prefer to
have a placeholder to support other parts of the standard than to
ignore locales. Still, I see the argument against.

Meanwhile, you might browse the MzScheme source to get ideas on using
the C library to get passable locale support.


More information about the R6RS mailing list