Received: from webgate.proteosys.de (mail.proteosys-ag.com [62.225.9.49]) by lucy.proteosys (8.11.0/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) with ESMTP id f4ED6Xf23602 for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 15:06:33 +0200 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f4ED6X721473 . for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 15:06:33 +0200 Received: from mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailserver1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.30]) by mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f4ED6TU24372 for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 15:06:29 +0200 (MET DST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C0DC76.B2C6D280" Received: from mailgate2.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailgate2.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.57]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA25962 for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 15:06:28 +0200 (MEST) Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (mail.listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.5]) by mailgate2.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f4ED6S025396 for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 15:06:28 +0200 (MET DST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.5) by mail.listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <12.B004FA55@mail.listserv.gmd.de>; Mon, 14 May 2001 15:04:50 +0200 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 495885 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 14 May 2001 15:06:25 +0200 Received: from ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (mail.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.234]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA14392 for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 15:06:23 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA27362 for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 15:06:23 +0200 Received: from musse.tninet.se (musse.tninet.se [195.100.94.12]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id f4ED6MQ01434 for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 15:06:22 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (qmail 27940 invoked from network); 14 May 2001 15:06:21 +0200 Received: from delenn.tninet.se (HELO algonet.se) (195.100.94.104) by musse.tninet.se with SMTP; 14 May 2001 15:06:21 +0200 Received: from [195.100.226.139] (du139-226.ppp.su-anst.tninet.se [195.100.226.139]) by delenn.tninet.se (BLUETAIL Mail Robustifier 2.2.2) with ESMTP id 526698.845578.989delenn-s0 for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 15:06:18 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <200105112029.f4BKT3707962@smtp.wanadoo.es> Return-Path: X-Sender: haberg@pop.matematik.su.se (Unverified) x-mime-autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de id PAA14393 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: Multilingual Encodings Summary 2.2 Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:03:48 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Hans Aberg" Sender: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" To: "Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L" Reply-To: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 4060 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0DC76.B2C6D280 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable At 23:58 +0200 2001/05/13, Lars Hellstr=F6m wrote: >Read Sections 8--12 (Section 12 in particular) of the Omega draft >documentation---that will answer you question more thoroughly that I = bother >to do right now. Marcel's summary contains a reference to it. I saw it. Using the lingo of section 12, I think that Omega needs a few more = modes, 32-bit characters, perhaps a few variable characters modes; possibly = also the option of being able to read compressed files. As for sections 8-9, I think that reading byte codes might still be = slow, because one is down on such a low level. On a fast machine, perhaps this does not matter. But this suggests that one may need to use C/C++ code translators, at = least for some common character encodings. One possibility might be, instead = of using byte codes, generate C/C++ source files as output, which can be compiled and linked (perhaps as DLL's) with the original program. The = byte codes would still be great in situations where C/C++ compilers are not available. But only profiler tests can tell whether it is worth the effort. Hans Aberg ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0DC76.B2C6D280 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: Multilingual Encodings Summary 2.2

At 23:58 +0200 2001/05/13, Lars Hellstr=F6m = wrote:
>Read Sections 8--12 (Section 12 in particular) of = the Omega draft
>documentation---that will answer you question = more thoroughly that I bother
>to do right now. Marcel's summary contains a = reference to it.

I saw it.

Using the lingo of section 12, I think that Omega = needs a few more modes,
32-bit characters, perhaps a few variable characters = modes; possibly also
the option of being able to read compressed = files.

As for sections 8-9, I think that reading byte codes = might still be slow,
because one is down on such a low level. On a fast = machine, perhaps this
does not matter.

But this suggests that one may need to use C/C++ code = translators, at least
for some common character encodings. One possibility = might be, instead of
using byte codes, generate C/C++ source files as = output, which can be
compiled and linked (perhaps as DLL's) with the = original program. The byte
codes would still be great in situations where C/C++ = compilers are not
available.

But only profiler tests can tell whether it is worth = the effort.

  Hans Aberg

------_=_NextPart_001_01C0DC76.B2C6D280--