From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Marius Vollmer Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: [d.love@dl.ac.uk: dynamic loading of native code modules] Date: 15 Apr 2002 14:15:23 +0200 Sender: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <873cxxkvj8.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> References: <874rifqeo8.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1018872922 9093 127.0.0.1 (15 Apr 2002 12:15:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 12:15:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Rob Browning , ttn@glug.org, guile-devel@gnu.org, guile-user@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16x5OD-0002MX-00 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2002 14:15:22 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16x5O4-0001Uv-00; Mon, 15 Apr 2002 08:15:12 -0400 Original-Received: from dialin.speedway42.dip75.dokom.de ([195.138.42.75] helo=zagadka.ping.de) by fencepost.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16x5LE-0001IQ-00 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2002 08:12:16 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 6088 invoked by uid 1000); 15 Apr 2002 12:15:23 -0000 Original-To: Neil Jerram In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 13 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 Errors-To: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:385 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:385 Neil Jerram writes: > Well, I agree with all the examples you give here, but what about the > following? > > - dropped support for multibyte strings [unless I'm misunderstanding > the old mailing lists, Guile used to have these !] Yes, we had them, but nobody was really supporting them in C code. Multi-byte strings were a distinct type from uni-byte strings, but almost everybody just wrote code to deal with uni-byte strings. (Rob has answered the rest already.) _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel