On 11 May 2011 13:36, Max Bolingbroke <batterseapo...@hotmail.com> wrote: > I thought you were arguing against choice 1 and in favour of 2 in your > initial message?
I've pushed my implementation pretty much as it was at the beginning of this thread to master so it can go into 7.2. Please let me know of any problems you encounter. I'm holding off converting it to use the private-use plane for escaping for now because: 1. I think it will probably lead to less problems in practice (though neither approach is problem free). I suspect we are more likely to find the private use plane in use in the wild, than we are to write a Haskell Unicode transformation pass that chokes on lone surrogates. 2. The surrogate-escape scheme is what the Python guys adopted and it is therefore at least somewhat "battle tested" Mark, if you have a good reason to push back on this please do so. Cheers, Max _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list Cvs-ghc@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
