Re: Bug#213127: ITP: extlib -- extended standard library for OCaml

["Sylvain LE GALL" <sylvain.le-gall@polytechnique.org>]

On Sun, Sep 28, 2003 at 04:27:34PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 28, 2003 at 04:09:28PM +0200, J?r?me Marant wrote:
> > > * Package name    : extlib
> > I could have bet someone would package this :-)
> 
> Indeed I was tempted to put some :-P at the end of the mail for the
> debian ocaml community :)))
> 
> > >   Version         : 1.0b
> > You should try to use another version, like 0.99b
> > otherwise you'll mess version numbers.
> 
> Yes, good suggestion.
> 
> > Since this lib provides utf-8 support, is Camomile worth packaging?
> > (it is a big bloat)
> 
> I need to investigate a bit mode, maybe with Sylvain too because the
> camomile author is still in the extlib project. Is thus possible that
> they have already discussed about the interconnections of the two
> packages, don't know yet.
> 
> Cheers.
> 

Re hello,

I just see the two ocamldoc page and i think camomile still worth the
value to be packaged :
http://camomile.sourceforge.net/dochtml/index.html


http://ocaml-lib.sourceforge.net/doc/UTF8.html
http://ocaml-lib.sourceforge.net/doc/UChar.html


I think there is a lot more in camomile than in extlib. The main
question is : "Is it worth to have two different representation ( maybe
incompatible ) of UTF-XX character ?".

As far as i can see, in camomile, there is module UTF8 UTF16 UCS4,
regular expression...

I think i will join the extlib ML in order to know more about it ! 

Regard
Sylvain LE GALL