News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Paul Graham's kind of dirty (On Unicode support as an exercise for the programmer). Parent comment

Re:Paul Graham's kind of dirty (On Unicode support as an exe... by byrneseyeview on Wednesday January 30, 2008 @02:29PM (#107004)
"I think the author fails to realize that Arc is open source and free. You want Unicode support? Write it in."

I would like to announce the release of my new language, Barc, as in the dog that didn't. My language is free and open-source. You want syntax? Write it in! You want a compiler? Be my guest!

I think failing to include Unicode is a valid decision, but yours is a weak argument -- if it's that trivial, why isn't it already written?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Paul Graham's kind of dirty (On Unicode support as an exe... by BrandonM on Wednesday January 30, 2008 @03:16PM (#107026)
Failing to include Unicode because you don't feel like doing it is a bad argument? So if I give you a gift certificate to go out to eat but fail to pay for your transportation, is that a bad idea, too?

You are the one with the weak argument. PG has offered up a language which is still being developed but already has some utility, and you're comparing that to a hypothetical language with nothing at all?

[ Parent | on HN ]