On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 2:03 PM, Donal K. Fellows
<donal.k.fellows@[...].uk>  wrote:
> 
>   The bytearray
>   doesn't have this problem, true, but I'm not convinced that just
>   adjusting that would be a good value investment (it might be possible to
>   justify it with additional functionality, such as supporting mapped
>   files, but that's a lot more work).

Donal, I've been thinking about this (read-only mmap seen as a
ByteArray) for weeks.
Does your remark mean that a contribution might get positive feedback ?
(anything above that of [lrange] counts as positive ;-)

-Alex

PS: also, I propose to fix the lack of zero-conversion byte array
support in CONCAT1, which is odd given the better support in [string
range].

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
Tcl-Core mailing list
Tcl-Core@[...].net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core