[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Scheme-reports] Comments on draft 7
- To: Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x>
- Subject: Re: [Scheme-reports] Comments on draft 7
- From: Takashi Kato <ktakashi@x>
- Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 11:21:29 +0100
- Cc: scheme-reports <scheme-reports@x>
- In-reply-to: <CAMMPzYMEtEb=yEcSqiQqYbZyG3aiJAKituZRtrGguenLPfmc7w@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <509E2400.email@example.com> <CAMMPzYMEtEb=yEcSqiQqYbZyG3aiJAKituZRtrGguenLPfmc7w@mail.gmail.com>
On 10/11/2012 11:06, Alex Shinn wrote:
> The set of characters supported and the set of characters
> supported within strings are not necessarily the same.
> Implementations may not support #\null within strings, but
> they must support the character.
It just doesn't make any sense to me that string can't handle #\null but
character can since string is a sequence of characters and it just seems
an ugly inconsistency.
If implementations must support the same range both string and
character, it seems much simpler and have more consistency, IMHO. (of
course it doesn't matter which range it follows.)
Scheme-reports mailing list