Re: Why there is no char type?

[Andy Wingo]

On Wed 15 Dec 2010 19:40, Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

> Then main reason I did not add a char type is that it would require a
> bunch of new primitives, adding permanently to the complexity of Emacs
> Lisp and its documentation.  As well as complexity of Lisp code that
> uses characters.

FWIW, I have not felt that a character type in Scheme was a burden in
any way; and it's nice to have a human-readable and -writable external
representation.

>From a selfish, wanting-emacs-on-guile POV, it would be a good thing for
emacs to have a character type. Obviously that's predicated on there
being someone willing to do the work, and suitable back-compatibility
support.

Guile's characters have space for buckybits, I think (space we don't
currently use, I mean).

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/