On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 9:10 AM, Gary Byers <gb@clozure.com> wrote:
If I understand this much correctly, then I can only say that I didn't personally find these arguments persuasive when I was trying to decide how CODE-CHAR should behave in CCL a few years ago and don't find them persuasive now.
It seems the discussion has run out of steam. Just to conclude it, I should ask: is it still the case that UTF-8B is not an argument compelling enough to make you consider a patch changing CODE-CHAR's behaviour, as well as the various encode- and decode-functions? (Such a patch would change CODE-CHAR to accept any code point, and deal with invalid code points explicitely in the UTF encoders and decoders.) -- Luís Oliveira http://student.dei.uc.pt/~lmoliv/