hi,

clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> (2) The internal string representation in the parser has to be changed
> from UCS-2 to /something/ else; I'm leaning towards UTF-32 encoded UCS-4
> because it means keeping string length related stuff simple and
> unambiguous. (This would also extend the numeric range of the `chr()`
> and `asc()` functions.)

there is a current thread on comp.lang.c which discusses this issue, subject
"fixed width unicode subsets".


regards ,jr.

Post a reply to this message