Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #387866 > unrolled thread

about some potentially interesting unicode operators

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c

Contents

  about some potentially interesting unicode operators fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-28 01:58 +0200
    Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> - 2024-08-28 14:17 +0000
      Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 12:46 -0700
        Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 13:30 -0700
        Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-28 23:15 +0000
          Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-28 17:04 -0700
            Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-08-29 04:07 +0200
              Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-08-29 17:17 +0200
                Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-29 09:59 -0700
                  Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-29 23:02 +0300
                    Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-08-29 20:18 +0000
                      Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-29 23:32 +0300
                        Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-08-29 21:24 +0000
                          Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-30 13:50 +0300
                      Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-29 13:41 -0700
                        Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-30 03:16 +0000
                          Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-08-29 21:35 -0700
                            Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-31 00:01 +0000
            Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-29 05:58 +0000
              Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators om@iki.fi (Otto J. Makela) - 2024-10-23 17:05 +0300
            Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-08-29 12:51 +0200
      Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-28 23:13 +0000
        Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-08-29 03:36 +0200
        Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators fir <fir@grunge.pl> - 2024-08-29 10:45 +0200
    Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-08-28 23:11 +0000
    Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-09-05 07:07 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#387866 — about some potentially interesting unicode operators

everyone knows how iportant are
operator symbols in C

i found it interesting to watch over
a unicode to find soem that could be
eventually interesting in a context of some language extensions

(somewhat offtioopic is there is some doubt if someone will add new one 
to old c, but theoretically still interesting - form me much practical 
as i work out new syntax and some
extensions over old c, privately)

so i wrote simple review of some of
them i found

mostly i write just to bit a bit clearer whats in teh bag

i start maybe with the less confusing
becouse later soem are confusing as
they are more close looking to some other and that may be confusing

for basic arrows

a←b a→b a↑b  a↓b   potentially quite usable (though i dont know for what)
(arrows may be for assigment but its not clear) a←←←b

in addition i find yet 3
a↔b a↕b a↨b , nice

superscriot (?) or how it is called
a¹ba¹º²³b , nice but i dont found
all digits nor normal leters - only some, all would be usefull, could be
good as part of user names (²could be handy for square but other would 
be wastefull used like that)

i didint found subscripts - though probably i watched only soem part of 
unicode - but will need to stay probably with this more central part 
probably

a±b a≈b a≠b a≡b a≤b a≥b

okay nice, could be handy

a«ba»b also nice,
a‹ba›b something liek above but single

a“xx”b" some two new upper
quotation signs - the clasical asci
is simple one those are more like left and right
a„ba„b there is also one new down
probably there is also yet one byt i mislooked it it seems

a‘b''a’b‘‘'’'’

same thing with this single quotation
two new ones

a´b 1`1´ a`s´s´dkm΄x´΄s ΄
brother of this little one that shares key with tilda, nice

there are more things liek that but
those are confusing so i skip it

there is yet third one (?) something
like those two but stright -
all are somewhat like singe quitation but very thin

a¯‾_‾_‾b¯1 ¯232a‾b
a ‾b_

upper underscore - thats real nice
mistake it is not in old asci imo

a‗ba‗b____‗

double underscore, also real nice

a·b·····

middle dot - terribly nice and good loking

a∙ba∙∙b

big middle dot very nice

a─b---─-─ ─────────-----

something like longer minus sign
- could be used to draw line

a,,b

something like , but smaller

a¨b¨¨a…ba…b

two up dots and 3 bot dots
(thos bot especially nice)

a⁄b//⁄⁄

something like slash but a bit
bigger and a bit more vertical

a■b a▬b a▲ba►ba▼ba◄b

rectangle queare and 4 triangles
nice

a◊ba○b☼☼a♦ a◘ba◙ba☺ba☻ba☼ba♀ba♂b
a♠ba♣ba♥ba♦ba♪ba♫b

also nice, this circle is good
rhombus or how it is called also good
a░b░░░▓▓▓▓▒▒░░░░
nice for drawing

a˙ba˙ba˚ba˚b

degree sign and something liek upper dot or small degre, im not sure

a˜b~ something liek small upper tilda

a⌂b⌂⌂⌂

home symbol?

a⌐b

nice geometrucal it is goiod loking imo maybe better than arrow (liek could
be used for assigment etc)


a√b
root symbol - could be nice

a=√a*a+b*b

a∞b
infinity?

a∟b
nice geometrical

a∩b
nice


a∫b - calculus, nice

a∆ba∂ba∏ba∑b
some greek ones i skipped most but
probably they should be used aside
normal abc like ∆b=b2-b1 etc

a‰b

dont know what it is but may be ok


a†ba‡b
also dont know but looks ok

a‼b

double ! very good
a¡b this one turn aroud, lookin good

a¦b

very nice

i ommited some but from those
mentioned a lot are very nice

though still i will probably
feel i need some i dont get
(liek i would have other -+
that would have like bigger priority
than mil div so could write some
espresions without ()

but some are real nice those are especially good imo:

¯2ba‗a∙ba∙∙bb·····──a≡ba…ba…ba⌐b
a∟ba∩ba∫ba■ba▬ba○b☼☼a‼b¡ba¦ab

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#387907

I personally hate all operators.  That said, i agree with the general idea 
that Unicode has a lot of symbols out of ASCII that are underutilized.  C 
has limitations on what symbols are permitted in identifiers, but in 
previous projects of mine, i was able to work within that prison and used 
the · character for a sort of psuedonamespacing.  (I later abandoned this 
practice for other reasons.)

-- 
Blue-Maned_Hawk│shortens to Hawk│/blu.mɛin.dʰak/│he/him/his/himself/Mr.
blue-maned_hawk.srht.site
Doesn't read mail (yet)!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#387932

Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> writes:
> I personally hate all operators.  That said, i agree with the general idea 
> that Unicode has a lot of symbols out of ASCII that are underutilized.  C 
> has limitations on what symbols are permitted in identifiers, but in 
> previous projects of mine, i was able to work within that prison and used 
> the · character for a sort of psuedonamespacing.  (I later abandoned this 
> practice for other reasons.)

A problem with using non-ASCII Unicode characters as operator
names is that they can be difficult to type -- and the way you type
them is inconsistent across systems.

There's nothing wrong with using identifiers as operator names.
C already does this with "sizeof" et al.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#387935

Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:
> Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@invalid.invalid> writes:
>> I personally hate all operators.  That said, i agree with the general idea 
>> that Unicode has a lot of symbols out of ASCII that are underutilized.  C 
>> has limitations on what symbols are permitted in identifiers, but in 
>> previous projects of mine, i was able to work within that prison and used 
>> the · character for a sort of psuedonamespacing.  (I later abandoned this 
>> practice for other reasons.)
>
> A problem with using non-ASCII Unicode characters as operator
> names is that they can be difficult to type -- and the way you type
> them is inconsistent across systems.
>
> There's nothing wrong with using identifiers as operator names.
> C already does this with "sizeof" et al.

I probably should have said "keywords" rather than "identifiers".

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#387942

On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 12:46:55 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:

> A problem with using non-ASCII Unicode characters as operator names is
> that they can be difficult to type -- and the way you type them is
> inconsistent across systems.

The best way is the Compose key available on *nix systems. This is the 
closest to a mnemonic-based system that reduces the burden on your memory.

<https://wiki.wlug.org.nz/ComposeKey>

> There's nothing wrong with using identifiers as operator names.
> C already does this with "sizeof" et al.

Except they add to your list of reserved words.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#387945

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
> On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 12:46:55 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> A problem with using non-ASCII Unicode characters as operator names is
>> that they can be difficult to type -- and the way you type them is
>> inconsistent across systems.
>
> The best way is the Compose key available on *nix systems. This is the 
> closest to a mnemonic-based system that reduces the burden on your memory.
>
> <https://wiki.wlug.org.nz/ComposeKey>

There is no "Compose" key on the keyboard I'm using to type this.
There is a key labeled "Alt Gr", but it doesn't appear to behave in
any consistent or useful way.  (I'm using a Windows laptop; "Alt Gr"
doesn't appear to do anything useful even in Windows PowerShell.)

If there's an easy way to type non-ASCII characters like '·' that
works across different systems, including all the various terminal
emulators used on Windows and Linux (as well as MacOS, but I don't
happen to use it), I'd love to know about it.  (I obtained that
'·' character by opening vim, entering the Ctrl-K . M digraph,
and copy-and-pasting into this window -- not something I'd be
willing to do every time I want to type an operator symbol.)

People who use non-English languages typically have keyboards with
accented letters and so forth.

>> There's nothing wrong with using identifiers as operator names.
>> C already does this with "sizeof" et al.
>
> Except they add to your list of reserved words.

That's not much of a problem if they're designed into the language from
the beginning.  (I'm not suggesting adding new keyword operator symbols
to C -- though C has been acquiring new keywords, including alignof
which is an operator and typeof which resembles one.)

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#387950

On 29.08.2024 02:04, Keith Thompson wrote:
> 
> There is no "Compose" key on the keyboard I'm using to type this.

Neither on mine. (I recall it from a friend's old IBM computer.
I think it was close to the separate number-block.)

> There is a key labeled "Alt Gr", but it doesn't appear to behave in
> any consistent or useful way. 

"Alt Gr" is different. It's used on my keyboards to have access
to a third layer of characters (e.g. € sign or various European
languages' characters).

I have two keyboards connected to my Linux computer, one with US
layout and one with DE layout, both having the "Alt GR" key but
only the DE keyboard seems to produce characters with that key.

> (I'm using a Windows laptop; "Alt Gr"
> doesn't appear to do anything useful even in Windows PowerShell.)
> 
> If there's an easy way to type non-ASCII characters like '·' that
> works across different systems, including all the various terminal
> emulators used on Windows and Linux (as well as MacOS, but I don't
> happen to use it), I'd love to know about it. 

I don't think there can be a portable or consistent way to create
that character. Incidentally (I just tried a few keys) I can get
the '·' by typing "Alt GR" and ',' (on my DE keyboard). But that
was of course coincidence that this character had been chosen to
be displayed with the "Alt Gr" key since there's only a limited
set of keys for additional characters physically available.

> (I obtained that
> '·' character by opening vim, entering the Ctrl-K . M digraph,
> and copy-and-pasting into this window -- not something I'd be
> willing to do every time I want to type an operator symbol.)

Understandably.

> 
> People who use non-English languages typically have keyboards with
> accented letters and so forth.

Correct.

> 
>>> There's nothing wrong with using identifiers as operator names.
>>> C already does this with "sizeof" et al.
>>
>> Except they add to your list of reserved words.
> 
> That's not much of a problem if they're designed into the language from
> the beginning.  (I'm not suggesting adding new keyword operator symbols
> to C -- though C has been acquiring new keywords, including alignof
> which is an operator and typeof which resembles one.)

Yes. - In Algol 68 you have separate name-spaces for identifiers.
User-defined operators are in the same name-space as the language
keywords and standard operators. The separation of name-spaces is
probably the reason why it's not considered that bad to have a lot
of keywords. C and C++ designers were much more concerned.

Janis

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#387993

On 29.08.2024 04:07, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
> On 29.08.2024 02:04, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>
>> If there's an easy way to type non-ASCII characters like '·' that
>> works across different systems, including all the various terminal
>> emulators used on Windows and Linux (as well as MacOS, but I don't
>> happen to use it), I'd love to know about it. 
> 
> I don't think there can be a portable or consistent way to create
> that character. Incidentally (I just tried a few keys) I can get
> the '·' by typing "Alt GR" and ',' (on my DE keyboard). [...]

Keith, what does your keyboard produce when typing <Alt>-<7> ?

On my US keyboard it produces the '·'. Don't know whether that
is reliable, though. (I don't think it is; e.g. my Thunderbird
doesn't expand any character when entering <Alt> combinations.)

Janis

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#388003

Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes:
> On 29.08.2024 04:07, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>> On 29.08.2024 02:04, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>>
>>> If there's an easy way to type non-ASCII characters like '·' that
>>> works across different systems, including all the various terminal
>>> emulators used on Windows and Linux (as well as MacOS, but I don't
>>> happen to use it), I'd love to know about it. 
>> 
>> I don't think there can be a portable or consistent way to create
>> that character. Incidentally (I just tried a few keys) I can get
>> the '·' by typing "Alt GR" and ',' (on my DE keyboard). [...]
>
> Keith, what does your keyboard produce when typing <Alt>-<7> ?
>
> On my US keyboard it produces the '·'. Don't know whether that
> is reliable, though. (I don't think it is; e.g. my Thunderbird
> doesn't expand any character when entering <Alt> combinations.)

It produces the two-character sequence Escape 7.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#388011

On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 09:59:49 -0700
Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:

> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes:
> > On 29.08.2024 04:07, Janis Papanagnou wrote:  
> >> On 29.08.2024 02:04, Keith Thompson wrote:  
> >>>
> >>> If there's an easy way to type non-ASCII characters like '·' that
> >>> works across different systems, including all the various terminal
> >>> emulators used on Windows and Linux (as well as MacOS, but I don't
> >>> happen to use it), I'd love to know about it.   
> >> 
> >> I don't think there can be a portable or consistent way to create
> >> that character. Incidentally (I just tried a few keys) I can get
> >> the '·' by typing "Alt GR" and ',' (on my DE keyboard). [...]  
> >
> > Keith, what does your keyboard produce when typing <Alt>-<7> ?
> >
> > On my US keyboard it produces the '·'. Don't know whether that
> > is reliable, though. (I don't think it is; e.g. my Thunderbird
> > doesn't expand any character when entering <Alt> combinations.)  
> 
> It produces the two-character sequence Escape 7.
> 

Which 7? The one on numeric pad produces • in quite a lot of contexts.
The character appears after release of Alt key.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#388012

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
>On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 09:59:49 -0700
>Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes:
>> > On 29.08.2024 04:07, Janis Papanagnou wrote: =20
>> >> On 29.08.2024 02:04, Keith Thompson wrote: =20
>> >>>
>> >>> If there's an easy way to type non-ASCII characters like '=C2=B7' that
>> >>> works across different systems, including all the various terminal
>> >>> emulators used on Windows and Linux (as well as MacOS, but I don't
>> >>> happen to use it), I'd love to know about it.  =20
>> >>=20
>> >> I don't think there can be a portable or consistent way to create
>> >> that character. Incidentally (I just tried a few keys) I can get
>> >> the '=C2=B7' by typing "Alt GR" and ',' (on my DE keyboard). [...] =20
>> >
>> > Keith, what does your keyboard produce when typing <Alt>-<7> ?
>> >
>> > On my US keyboard it produces the '=C2=B7'. Don't know whether that
>> > is reliable, though. (I don't think it is; e.g. my Thunderbird
>> > doesn't expand any character when entering <Alt> combinations.) =20
>>=20
>> It produces the two-character sequence Escape 7.
>>=20
>
>Which 7? The one on numeric pad produces =E2=80=A2 in quite a lot of contex=
>ts.
>The character appears after release of Alt key.
>

The numeric pad ALT-'7' produces <esc>[H (home cursor).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#388014

On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 20:18:20 GMT
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:

> Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
> >On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 09:59:49 -0700
> >Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
> >  
> >> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes:  
> >> > On 29.08.2024 04:07, Janis Papanagnou wrote: =20  
> >> >> On 29.08.2024 02:04, Keith Thompson wrote: =20  
> >> >>>
> >> >>> If there's an easy way to type non-ASCII characters like
> >> >>> '=C2=B7' that works across different systems, including all
> >> >>> the various terminal emulators used on Windows and Linux (as
> >> >>> well as MacOS, but I don't happen to use it), I'd love to know
> >> >>> about it.  =20  
> >> >>=20
> >> >> I don't think there can be a portable or consistent way to
> >> >> create that character. Incidentally (I just tried a few keys) I
> >> >> can get the '=C2=B7' by typing "Alt GR" and ',' (on my DE
> >> >> keyboard). [...] =20  
> >> >
> >> > Keith, what does your keyboard produce when typing <Alt>-<7> ?
> >> >
> >> > On my US keyboard it produces the '=C2=B7'. Don't know whether
> >> > that is reliable, though. (I don't think it is; e.g. my
> >> > Thunderbird doesn't expand any character when entering <Alt>
> >> > combinations.) =20  
> >>=20
> >> It produces the two-character sequence Escape 7.
> >>=20  
> >
> >Which 7? The one on numeric pad produces =E2=80=A2 in quite a lot of
> >contex= ts.
> >The character appears after release of Alt key.
> >  
> 
> The numeric pad ALT-'7' produces <esc>[H (home cursor).

It looks like your usenet client displays my post quite differently from
my client. In order to establish a common ground please look at my post
here:
https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=39202&group=comp.lang.c#39202

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#388017

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
>On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 20:18:20 GMT
>scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
>

>> >contex= ts.
>> >The character appears after release of Alt key.
>> >  
>> 
>> The numeric pad ALT-'7' produces <esc>[H (home cursor).
>
>It looks like your usenet client displays my post quite differently from
>my client. In order to establish a common ground please look at my post

Perhaps you could avoid unnecessary UTF-8 instead...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#388033

On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 21:24:16 GMT
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:

> Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
> >On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 20:18:20 GMT
> >scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
> >  
> 
> >> >contex= ts.
> >> >The character appears after release of Alt key.
> >> >    
> >> 
> >> The numeric pad ALT-'7' produces <esc>[H (home cursor).  
> >
> >It looks like your usenet client displays my post quite differently
> >from my client. In order to establish a common ground please look at
> >my post  
> 
> Perhaps you could avoid unnecessary UTF-8 instead...

Perhaps in this particular theme they are necessary.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#388015

scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
> Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
>>On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 09:59:49 -0700
>>Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes:
[...]
>>> > Keith, what does your keyboard produce when typing <Alt>-<7> ?
>>> >
>>> > On my US keyboard it produces the '·'. Don't know whether that
>>> > is reliable, though. (I don't think it is; e.g. my Thunderbird
>>> > doesn't expand any character when entering <Alt> combinations.)
>>>
>>> It produces the two-character sequence Escape 7.
>>
>>Which 7? The one on numeric pad produces • in quite a lot of contexts.
>>The character appears after release of Alt key.
>
> The numeric pad ALT-'7' produces <esc>[H (home cursor).

(I manually cleaned up some quoted-printable damage in the above.)

The numeric pad keys send different characters depending on whether Num
Lock is set.  I usually have it on.

Alt-7 sends the same thing (Escape-7) both for the 7 key above Y and U
and for the 7 key on the numeric pd.  With Num Lock off, that key acts
as the Home key; Home sends ^[[1~ and Alt-Home sends ^[[1;3H, where ^[
is Escape.

There are probably some subtleties I'm missing.  I rarely use either Alt
or AltGr.  I don't often need to type non-ASCII characters; when I do,
my most common approach is to use vim digraphs.  Possibly I could find a
method that's more convenient, but so far I haven't been motivated to do
so.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#388026

On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 13:41:35 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:

> I don't often need to type non-ASCII characters; when I do,
> my most common approach is to use vim digraphs.

Does it let you type (part or all of) Unicode names?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#388030

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
> On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 13:41:35 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> I don't often need to type non-ASCII characters; when I do,
>> my most common approach is to use vim digraphs.
>
> Does it let you type (part or all of) Unicode names?

I don't think so.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#388041

On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 21:35:29 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>>
>> On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 13:41:35 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't often need to type non-ASCII characters; when I do,
>>> my most common approach is to use vim digraphs.
>>
>> Does it let you type (part or all of) Unicode names?
> 
> I don't think so.

Emacs does.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#387952

On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 17:04:46 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>>
>> On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 12:46:55 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>>
>>> A problem with using non-ASCII Unicode characters as operator names is
>>> that they can be difficult to type -- and the way you type them is
>>> inconsistent across systems.
>>
>> The best way is the Compose key available on *nix systems. This is the
>> closest to a mnemonic-based system that reduces the burden on your
>> memory.
>>
>> <https://wiki.wlug.org.nz/ComposeKey>
> 
> There is no "Compose" key on the keyboard I'm using to type this.

Remember, you can assign your own keys on *nix GUIs.

I use Caps Lock for this purpose.

> People who use non-English languages typically have keyboards with
> accented letters and so forth.

As I have mentioned before, the idea that only “non-English languages” 
needs such symbols demonstrates a certain ... naïveté.

Lawrence
living near a district named Waipā, down the road from Tāmaki Makaurau
recently bought a product from overseas priced in £
has published software subject to ©

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#388733

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

> On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 17:04:46 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> There is no "Compose" key on the keyboard I'm using to type this.
>
> Remember, you can assign your own keys on *nix GUIs.
>
> I use Caps Lock for this purpose.

I've repurposed the bottom row "menu" key on my keyboard,
since the Mate window manager I use really doesn't require it.

>> People who use non-English languages typically have keyboards with
>> accented letters and so forth.
>
> As I have mentioned before, the idea that only “non-English languages”
> needs such symbols demonstrates a certain ... naïveté.

I like using compose - > to produce "→" and compose . . for "…"
even when I'm writing English.

-- 
   /* * * Otto J. Makela <om@iki.fi> * * * * * * * * * */
  /* Phone: +358 40 765 5772, ICBM: N 60 10' E 24 55' */
 /* Mail: Mechelininkatu 26 B 27,  FI-00100 Helsinki */
/* * * Computers Rule 01001111 01001011 * * * * * * */

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c

csiph-web