On Wed, 2014-07-02 at 08:04 -0700, Per Bothner wrote:

> In other words: Supporting string-replace! has no extra overheads beyond
> requiring an "indirect" representation.  The latter is forced anyway if
> you support mutability and full Unicode, unless you use 3- or 4-byte characters.
> Even if you do use 3- or 4-byte characters, indirection is worth it, because
> mutable fixed-size strings is an essentially-useless feature.

Are there any extant examples of 3-byte code units in strings?
I would find that - interesting.

				Bear

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