[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Character and output-width proposals
From: david carlton <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Aubrey Jaffer <email@example.com>
Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Subject: Re: Character and output-width proposals
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 92 15:44:32 -0400
On Sun, 31 May 92 23:34:57 -0400, "Aubrey Jaffer" <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> char-code-limit constant
> Is an integer 1 larger that the upper bound of the values which can be
> returned by char->integer.
> char-code-lower-limit constant
> Is the lower bound of the values which can be returned by
I see no reason why these numbers should exist at all.
I see no reason why CHAR->INTEGER and INTEGER->CHAR should exist at
all. They are and can be of no portable use.
They make about as much sense as having a standard INEXACT->INTEGER
procedure which returns an integer with the same bit-pattern as that
of the inexact number's internal representation.