Add support for Unicode normalization output iterators

[tahonermann]

No description provided.

[ruoso]

I would argue that normalization shouldn't be an output iterator, but rather a transform algorithm.

[tahonermann]

I tend to agree that, in most cases, treating normalization as a transcoding operation is probably what is desirable. Such an interface can be specialized for particular iterators (pointers) to provide higher performance as well. The benefit of an output iterator (or a proxy input iterator) is that the transformation can be done lazily. I think both interfaces have their uses.

[ruoso]

I think that is an academical use case. In practice the reason why you need
to normalize the text is because you will perform an operation that
requires the text to be normalized.

Making the normalizing into an output iterator would be technically valid,
but semantically confusing.

Em sáb, 24 de set de 2016 18:14, Tom Honermann [email protected]
escreveu:

I tend to agree that, in most cases, treating normalization as a
transcoding operation is probably what is desirable. Such an interface can
be specialized for particular iterators (pointers) to provide higher
performance as well. The benefit of an output iterator (or a proxy input
iterator) is that the transformation can be done lazily. I think both
interfaces have their uses.

—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#20 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAE9K53M6Ig3W4DnWU9QRItO7KXiHy39ks5qtaCmgaJpZM4Hoxuy
.

[tahonermann]

I can see use cases for wanting to perform an operation on normalized text in a lazy fashion.

Regardless, I agree that a transcoding interface has more potential uses. That falls under issue #4.