From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Thien-Thi Nguyen <ttn@gnuvola.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs
Subject: Re: string-ci* oddity
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 03:36:09 +0100
Organization: sometimes
Message-ID: <873ag2igdi.fsf@ambire.localdomain>
References: <20081219145350.M61823@ccrma.Stanford.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1230954043 4907 80.91.229.12 (3 Jan 2009 03:40:43 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 03:40:43 +0000 (UTC)
To: bug-guile@gnu.org
Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jan 03 04:41:53 2009
Return-path: <bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Envelope-to: guile-bugs@m.gmane.org
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
	id 1LIxOX-00016n-Jk
	for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 03 Jan 2009 04:41:49 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42588 helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LIxNI-0003Ul-8r
	for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2009 22:40:32 -0500
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LIxMy-0003SX-SK
	for bug-guile@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2009 22:40:13 -0500
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LIxMw-0003QK-9w
	for bug-guile@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2009 22:40:10 -0500
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=34536 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LIxMv-0003Q0-4A
	for bug-guile@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2009 22:40:09 -0500
Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:34577 helo=ciao.gmane.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <guile-bugs@m.gmane.org>)
	id 1LIxMu-0006wX-JK
	for bug-guile@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2009 22:40:08 -0500
Original-Received: from root by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LIxMo-0002Dx-Pg
	for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Jan 2009 03:40:03 +0000
Original-Received: from host141-71-dynamic.21-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it
	([79.21.71.141]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
	id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
	for <bug-guile@gnu.org>; Sat, 03 Jan 2009 03:40:02 +0000
Original-Received: from ttn by host141-71-dynamic.21-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it with
	local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
	for <bug-guile@gnu.org>; Sat, 03 Jan 2009 03:40:02 +0000
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
Original-Lines: 31
Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: host141-71-dynamic.21-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:01N0K9Vg6I/kZuF+HRbvoMkkM9A=
X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6,
	seldom 2.4 (older, 4)
X-BeenThere: bug-guile@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Bug reports for GUILE,
	GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language" <bug-guile.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile>,
	<mailto:bug-guile-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/bug-guile>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-guile@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-guile-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile>,
	<mailto:bug-guile-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Original-Sender: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Errors-To: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:4151
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.bugs/4151>

() "Bill Schottstaedt" <bil@ccrma.Stanford.EDU>
() Fri, 19 Dec 2008 06:55:21 -0800

   Why do both Guile and Gauche give this result in string-ci<?
   (and the other string-ci functions similarly):

   The odd chars are ASCII 91 to 96:

ASCII 91-96 lie between the two ranges A-Z and a-z.
One procedure smashes case up and the other down.
Smashing happens unconditionally.

(define (my-char-ci<? p q)
  (< (down p)) (down q))

Another more complicated (but arguably more correct) approach
would be to determine if one/both of the args are not smashable,
and entirely avoid smashing in that case.  Something like:

(define (smashable? c)
  (or (<= #\a c #\z) (<= #\A c #\Z)))

(define (my-char-ci<? p q)
  (if (and (smashable? p) (smashable? q))
      (< (down p) (down q))
      (< p q)))

Pseudoscheme (numeric operators don't actually take chars),
but you get the idea.

thi