Unicode patch
stephane ducasse
stephane.ducasse at free.fr
Thu Jun 14 20:18:33 UTC 2007
> Just from glancing at the code this cannot possibly be right.
>
> Like, in many places the isWideString test is simply replaced with
> isFourByteString. But the distinction we need to make is wether we
> have character values below 256 or above (for example to choose
> between the old and the MultiByteScanner). So #isWideString needs
> to be preserved and answer true for all Strings that have character
> values >= 256.
>
> As for the internal representation of TwoByteStrings; I'm not sure
> using big endian on all platforms is a good idea. Should certainly
> be discussed - like, it might be valuable to hand that string to a
> primitive and then platform order would be better.
>
> Also, the renaming of WideString without providing proper
> conversion methods will most certainly break existing projects.
>
> Then there are a lot of nits to pick - like the class comments are
> wrong, ByteString>>replaceFrom:... only creates 32 bit strings,
> bitShift is used all over the place when Smalltalk code
> traditionally uses * and //, what is TwoByteString>>printString
> good for, why does TwoByteString>>asByteString do an unnecessary
> copy etc.
>
> Before inclusion this still needs a lot of work and testing.
Sounds like. Thanks for the feedback bert.
Stef
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|