Re: Strange crash on custom iterator

[Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com>]

On Tue, 3 Jul 2018 18:59:57 -0700 (PDT), Lucretia
<laguest9000@googlemail.com> declaimed the following:

>
>I've just read it. Yeah, I agree that Ada should be able to extend records with data, not functions/procedures, but I don't see how the lack of that is a hindrance to creating a decent unicode lib. The fact that he refuses to answer such a simple question, i.e "WTF are you on about?" explains a lot.

	Ah, but what IS a "decent unicode lib(rary)"?

	There is a regular over in comp.lang.python who tends to rant that
Python 3.2 (maybe 3.1) "broke" unicode handling because some of his
non-real-world benchmarks run slower.

	Current Python3 internally uses 1, 2, or 4 bytes per character in a
string based upon the widest individual character. If everything fits in
8-bits, it uses 1-byte/char strings. If even one character requires
16-bits, the entire string will use 2-byte/char. Of course, since strings
are immutable in Python, there is no concern about replacing one char in a
1-byte/char string with a 2-byte char -- one has to create a whole new
string, which operation detects the presence of a 2-byte char and allocates
all characters as 2-byte wide.

	The scheme allows for direct indexing of characters -- no confusion of
indexing a prefix byte, or misinterpreting a suffix byte.

	I don't think such a string type would go far in Ada: one loses
mutation in place, and also can not define memory usage limits ahead of
time (unless one provides for worst case 4-byte/char -- in which case one
might just use that all the way through and retain in place mutation).


-- 
	Wulfraed                 Dennis Lee Bieber         AF6VN
	wlfraed@ix.netcom.com    HTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/