RE Module Performance

[wxjmfauth at gmail.com]

Le vendredi 26 juillet 2013 05:09:34 UTC+2, Michael Torrie a écrit :
> On 07/25/2013 11:18 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> 
> > JMF has explained that it is impossible, impossible I say!, to write an 
> 
> > editor using a flexible string representation. Since Emacs uses such a 
> 
> > flexible string representation, Emacs is impossible, and therefore Emacs 
> 
> > doesn't exist.
> 
> 
> 
> Now I'm even more confused.  He once pointed to Go as an example of how
> 
> unicode should be done in a language.  yet Go uses UTF-8 I think.
> 
> 
> 
> But I don't think UTF-8 is what JMF refers to as "flexible string
> 
> representation."  FSR does use 1,2 or 4 bytes per character, but each
> 
> character in the string uses the same width.  That's different from
> 
> UTF-8 or UTF-16, which is variable width per character.

-----

>>> sys.getsizeof('––') - sys.getsizeof('–')

I have already explained / commented this.

--------


Hint: To understand Unicode (and every coding scheme), you should
understand "utf". The how and the *why*.

jmf