4 ms·
That is an excellent point. There are a few notable shortcomings in Standard ML and I often wonder what the harm would be to create a language that diverges fro
by eatonphil 10y ago
That is an excellent point. There are a few notable shortcomings in Standard ML and I often wonder what the harm would be to create a language that diverges from the standard to support some very basic (but fundamental) features that one needs in 2016. But then I remember that's similar to how Haskell happened and I shy away.
- gnud 10y agoThe SML standard defines a WideChar and WideString, that are compatible with the String type. A SML implementation could just say 'WideChar' = UTF-32 and WideString is unicode, and all source files are utf-8. I think that would be within the standard.
- eatonphil 10y agoMy reading of the MLton page [0] on the subject suggests that the standard is in fact insufficient for full unicode support. [0] http://mlton.org/Unicode http://mlton.org/Unicode