Alaric Snell-Pym scripsit:

> I think it's worth mentioning that if the implementation supports
> exciting beyond-ASCII (not just Unicode) digits, their numeric value (as
> defined in whatever standard defines the character set, such as the
> Unicode numeric value proprety) needs to be supported by the
> implementation, for consistency.

AFAIK only Unicode has any concept of the decimal-digit value property,
and no other character set supports any digits other than the European
(ASCII) set.

> I'm ambivalent about digit-value in WG1; certainly it needs to exist in
> some form as part of a WG2 "character properties" thingy if it's not in WG1.

It will be.  See UcdCowan for a proposal.

> char-numeric? certainly seems to be of limited use without it, but
> is the char-numeric?/digit-value pair actually useful at all in the
> scope of WG1, given string->number?

Unless we are to extend `string->number` to handle non-European digits
(and then `read`, and then numeric literals?), I think so.

--
A rose by any other name                            John Cowan
may smell as sweet,                                 http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
but if you called it an onion                       cowan@ccil.org
you'd get cooks very confused.          --RMS

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports