3 ms·
those "autogenerated 'synthetic' codepoints" aren't guaranteed to be identical across runs Indeed: It's not an exchange format, but the format of the internal
by cygx 9y ago
those "autogenerated 'synthetic' codepoints" aren't guaranteed to be identical across runs
Indeed: It's not an exchange format, but the format of the internal in-memory string representation.
- kibwen 9y agoIf it's only intended as an in-memory representation, then how about a 24-bit representation, which is just as likely to work "in practice, if not in theory" as the 32-bit representation, while saving 25% of the memory? That gives you 16 million unique grapheme clusters per program instance, which, heck, is probably still more than 99% of programs use; you could easily get away with a 16-bit representation and use no more memory for strings than Java, C#, or Javascript. It's not like using a unique superset of UTF-32 is saving anyone the hassle of needing to convert between formats, since the vast majority of the world is ASCII-ish, UTF-8, and UTF-16 anyway.
- cygx 9y ago> how about a 24-bit representation Because 24-bit integers are not a thing on x86?
- kibwen 9y agoWho says you need to use integers? You're completely ignoring my question. Again, if you know of a design doc buried on a mailing list somewhere please just link me to that so that I can answer all of my questions at once.