Python syntax in Lisp and Scheme

[james anderson]

Andrew Dalke wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
> Python does it by ignoring the respective os APIs,

oh.

>   if I understand
> your meaning and Python's implementation correctly.  Here's some
> more information about Unicode in Python
> 
> http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0100.html
> http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0261.html
> http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0277.html
> 

pep-0261 was to the point. facit: if you build your python for 4-byte
characters you get the full range of scalar values (ie characters) as first
class objects. if you build your python for 2-byte characters you have to
model all scalar values outside of the basic plane as two disjoint code values.

it's analogous to wide/narrow characters in acl, and i recall there being an
open-source lisp which supported 4-byte builds. each catering to their users.
as the saying goes, everybody cooks with water. 

i'd be curious to hear:

was pep-0261 adopted?

has there been any data collected on how many installations are built in the
respective modes. for users in the 4-byte mode, has there been any data on
storage efficiency? on general string-related algorithm performance?

do python programmers really not care about using things like os-native
international type support? [0]


> ...
> 
> 
> I fully understand that it isn't part of the standard, but it would be
> useful if there was a consensus that "packages X, Y, and Z will
> always be included in our distributions."

that may be a market issue. vendors supply what their clients pay for. they
have an interest in product differentiation. open-source developers develop
what they need. they have an interest that their implmentation serves their
needs. there is some overlap, but evidently the market does not compel the
order of consolidation which you envision.

...

[0] http://developer.apple.com/intl/atsui.html