Unicode (Was: mikemac's proposal)
C. H. Graham
Fri, 9 May 1997 12:15:17 -0400
There's a new standard called "Multicode", which subsumes Unicode and
addresses the shortcomings of Unicode, according to the author. Don't have
> From: Pierpaolo Bernardi <bernardp@CLI.DI.Unipi.IT>
> To: Peter.VanEynde <email@example.com>
> Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Unicode (Was: mikemac's proposal)
> Date: Friday, May 09, 1997 10:31 AM
> > On Mon, 5 May 1997, Pierpaolo Bernardi wrote:
> > ....
> > > works on ascii streams, aka the console, serial lines, ...
> > > ^^^^^
> > >
> > > You mean Unicode, don't you?
> > Sorry for the late response, but it's all going too fast :-)
> > I strongly agree that we should use unicode. In fact we should make no
> > assumptions about the locality at all. It's on my todo list for CMUCL.
> > (not that I have the time or the expertise to actually _do_ it :-()
> > Groetjes, Peter
> That's great. I actually was suggesting to use Unicode _if_ we were
> going to write something from scratch, and to use whatever there was
> available if using cmucl. Of course, Unicode in cmucl would be the best.
> If you don't already know it, the following paper may be useful:
> http://plan9.bell-labs.com/plan9/doc/utf.html or
> it describes what the plan9 implementors had to do in order to convert
> most Unix (sorry 8-) utilities to Unicode.
> How do you plan to make readtables in Unicode work? or are you
> considering unicode only for characters and strings, and not for
> source code?
> Groetjes, Pierpaolo.