From: Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Date: 2006-06-29T16:42:49+09:00
Subject: Re: Unicode roadmap?

Hi,

In message "Re: Unicode roadmap?"
    on Thu, 29 Jun 2006 16:33:19 +0900, Juergen Strobel <strobel@secure.at> writes:

|I don't think you can possibly cater to everyone here.  Simplicissity,
|Flexibility, Performance, take any two. My impression is that M17N is
|going for maximum flexibility with good performance, but for
|e.g. Unicode only users there'll be some extra complexity to be aware
|of. I don't think you'll sacrifice Unicode users totally, but it is
|not your top priority either.

I can't promise implementation simplicity.  Because it would not be
inside.  But I am trying to build "pseudo simplicity", which means
simplicity in the appearance.  For example, text processing code with
file I/O in Ruby will keep being much simpler than Java.

|And I understood you expressed this yourself in the following quote.

Don't get me wrong without context.  You've said that "this approach
is complex, and worth it for 10% or less of Ruby users".  And I said,
"unfortunately I am one of those 10% or less.  You cannot stop Ruby
being (implementation) complex".  Clear?

							matz.