Hacker News Reader

The reason this is so is that there is no way to say "the library accepts UTF-32, for other encodings use the standard decoder" because there is no such a decoder. "For want of a nail". So it circles back to the idea of easily composable software which is not yet there. Everybody bring their own nails and there is no way to move nails between projects.

View on HN

What do you mean that there is no standard decoder? For what, UTF-8?

I agree on the composability. Accepting Unicode code points is more generic. I guess it depends on your environment. If every caller will combine it with a UTF-8 decoder, you might want to include it.

I meant something like a standard component that everybody uses (or a selection of components that vary here and there but are interchangeable in general). A catalog of such components; a - well, I'll say it - a software factory that builds them, a fast one, a slower but very detailed on errors, one that accepts single bytes, one that takes a pointer to a string, and so on, all different, yet all working in the same way as far as the main task is concerned.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com