Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #77629 > unrolled thread
| Started by | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-12-02 08:01 -0800 |
| Last post | 2015-12-06 13:45 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 158 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
unicode is a fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-12-02 08:01 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail me <self@example.org> - 2015-12-02 16:12 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-12-02 09:09 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-02 08:18 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-12-02 09:07 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-02 11:21 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-12-02 09:40 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-12-02 11:22 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-02 15:59 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-12-02 16:25 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-02 19:47 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-12-02 14:38 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-12-02 16:26 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-12-09 11:33 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-12-09 12:21 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-12-03 11:28 +0100
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-03 08:50 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-12-03 16:38 +0100
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-03 10:01 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-12-03 09:46 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-12-04 12:39 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-12-03 08:26 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-12-03 18:42 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-12-03 17:14 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-03 19:02 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-12-04 06:35 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2015-12-28 05:11 -0500
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-04 10:24 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-12-03 22:37 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-12-04 11:32 +0100
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-02 11:10 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-12-02 09:24 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-02 13:10 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-12-02 19:45 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-12-03 09:08 +1300
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-02 14:10 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-12-02 11:27 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-02 15:21 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-12-02 15:18 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-12-04 12:45 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-12-02 09:43 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-02 11:40 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-12-02 12:19 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Nobody <nobody@nowhere.invalid> - 2015-12-02 21:23 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-12-03 10:12 +0100
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-03 02:13 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-12-03 14:11 +0100
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-03 05:17 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-12-03 15:33 +0100
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-03 07:05 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-12-03 16:42 +0100
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-03 07:58 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-12-03 10:38 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-12-03 14:17 +0100
Re: unicode is a fail raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-12-04 12:54 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-12-04 14:25 +0100
Re: unicode is a fail Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-12-04 13:46 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-12-02 23:24 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-12-03 00:45 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-02 20:59 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-02 19:13 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-12-03 07:00 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-04 04:45 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-12-04 18:04 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-12-04 13:22 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-04 07:35 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-12-04 19:17 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-12-04 11:49 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-04 15:39 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-12-04 14:19 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-06 12:57 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-12-06 15:47 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-12-05 01:13 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-12-05 01:59 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-12-05 17:17 +0100
Re: unicode is a fail Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-12-06 06:28 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-12-04 23:46 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-12-05 01:04 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-05 03:21 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-05 13:03 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-12-05 11:47 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-05 04:40 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-12-05 13:26 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-05 13:35 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-12-06 02:23 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Udyant Wig <udyantw@gmail.com> - 2015-12-06 16:09 +0530
Re: unicode is a fail Xavier <zaz.colmant@free.fr> - 2015-12-05 15:45 +0100
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-05 07:42 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-12-05 16:32 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-05 18:11 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-12-06 02:19 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-12-06 13:09 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-06 18:38 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-12-07 01:55 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-06 19:14 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-12-07 13:53 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-07 06:31 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-12-07 21:22 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-07 15:34 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-07 16:36 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Lowell Gilbert <lgusenet@be-well.ilk.org> - 2015-12-08 11:40 -0500
Re: unicode is a fail Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-12-08 17:18 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-12-09 08:36 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-09 10:06 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-12-09 09:35 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-12-09 10:07 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-12-09 12:04 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-12-09 12:35 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-12-09 23:46 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-12-09 16:15 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-12-10 03:49 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-09 18:12 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-12-09 13:12 -0500
Re: unicode is a fail Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-12-09 12:12 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-12-10 20:48 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-12-09 23:44 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-10 01:13 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-12-10 10:39 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-10 03:33 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-12-10 06:07 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-12-10 08:21 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-10 00:59 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-12-07 14:33 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-06 22:45 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-12-07 12:38 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-07 13:55 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-12-07 21:14 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-07 16:50 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-07 02:38 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-12-06 07:34 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-06 00:24 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-04 19:49 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-12-05 21:32 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-05 13:50 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-12-05 22:15 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-12-05 17:27 -0500
Re: unicode is a fail Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-12-05 23:06 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-12-05 18:29 -0500
Re: unicode is a fail Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-12-05 23:50 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-12-06 06:38 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-12-06 13:33 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-12-05 16:51 -0500
Re: unicode is a fail Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-12-06 10:59 +1300
Re: unicode is a fail Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-12-06 11:00 +1300
Re: unicode is a fail Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-12-06 06:31 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-12-02 17:48 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-12-03 01:20 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-12-03 02:02 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-03 09:43 -0600
Re: unicode is a fail raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-12-04 12:55 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-12-04 18:29 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-12-05 16:42 +0000
Re: unicode is a fail Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-12-05 10:06 +0000
OT: Usenet (Was: unicode is a fail) Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-12-05 20:41 +0000
Re: OT: Usenet (Was: unicode is a fail) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-12-05 13:18 -0800
Re: unicode is a fail Udyant Wig <udyantw@gmail.com> - 2015-12-06 10:21 +0530
OT: Facebook (was Re: unicode is a fail) Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-12-06 08:51 +0000
Re: OT: Facebook (was Re: unicode is a fail) raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-12-06 13:45 +0000
Page 2 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-04 12:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <56618953.8894859@news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #77743 |
Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: > On 03-Dec-15 04:28, David Brown wrote: > > (Noting, however, that non-BMP characters are rare except for CJK > > That depends; all of the new emoji are non-BMP, for instance, and many > of us encounter those on a daily basis. I wouldn't call that "rare". I would, however, call it "an abomination that should never have been accepted in a serious standard". Richard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | supercat@casperkitty.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-03 08:26 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <0bf2d17a-94e7-4775-b658-03b4efc6e26c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #77721 |
On Thursday, December 3, 2015 at 4:28:42 AM UTC-6, David Brown wrote: > UTF-32 also has endian issues, and while it has one code unit (i.e., > 32-bit number) per code point (i.e., Unicode character), you still don't > have a one-to-one correspondence between code points and glyphs. So > UTF-32 does not make unicode as easy as ASCII - nor does it make it > fixed length. For example, é can be made from a single character > U+00E9, or from two characters: e and ́́ which combine to look like é . > You cannot therefore assume that one 32-bit code unit is one character. Returning to the subject of C, to what extent are compilers expected to understand Unicode? If an identifier token in one part of the code uses the combined form of "é" and another uses a combining diacritic and a lowercase "e", do they represent the same name or not? Personally, I believe that computer languages should be designed so that things that don't match are visually recognizable as such. Maybe I'm being overly Anglocentric, but would tend to think that having to learn to recognize 63 distinct characters that may appear in identifier names would be a much smaller burden than having to recognize many thousands of characters, some of which look exactly alike in most fonts. While I recognize that there is value in being able to have names that are human- readable in different languages, I would think that there would be some benefit to saying that programmers who are going to use non-ASCII characters in variable names would be required to supply a translation table for converting names to a canonical form such that identifiers are only regarded as matching if the given form and canonical forms both match perfectly, but are only regarded as non matching if both forms differ. Programs where the canonical form matches an inner-scope variable but the given form does not should be rejected altogether. Under such rules, taking a valid source file and translating everything to its canonical form would yield a source file semantically equivalent to the original, thus allowing someone who is unfamiliar with the language of the original to examine the code in canonical form and be able to tell which identifiers match and which don't, even if the person had no idea what any of the identifiers meant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-03 18:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n3q2f8$q40$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #77760 |
supercat@casperkitty.com wrote: (snip on unicode) > Returning to the subject of C, to what extent are compilers expected to > understand Unicode? If an identifier token in one part of the code uses > the combined form of "é" and another uses a combining diacritic and a > lowercase "e", do they represent the same name or not? Java source input is unicode, at least in theory, and all unicode letters and, after the first letter, digits, are allowed in identifiers. There are \uxxxx escapes to allow entering unicode characters, and \uuxxxx escapes to escape a unicode escape. You can terminate lines with \u000a and quote strings with \u0022. (That is, following the earlier discussion on comments, unicode escapes are processed early.) -- glen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | supercat@casperkitty.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-03 17:14 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <28cd8129-3be8-430b-8271-d25e4a80522f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #77772 |
On Thursday, December 3, 2015 at 12:43:04 PM UTC-6, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
> Java source input is unicode, at least in theory, and all unicode
> letters and, after the first letter, digits, are allowed in identifiers.
How are things supposed to be displayed, either in source-code or generated
output? For example, if one took a statement like:
printf("version=%04x checksum=%04x");
and replaced version with Hebrew [courtesy Google translate] "גִרְסָה" and
checksum with "בדיקת", the code would then read:
printf("גִרְסָה=%04x בדיקת=%04x");
I have no idea whether such code would print the numbers in order but the
Hebrew words backward, or the letters of the words in order but the numbers
backward, or whether the numbers would get scrambled based upon whether
they contain any digits a-f but I can't imagine anything good happening.
FYI, one can play around with such things at http://jsfiddle.net/8k12dggb/
if one goes to the box at the right and types something. The uppercase
letters W, X, and Y will get replaced with Hebrew letters that look a little
bit like those Latin ones, but the string rendering is bizarre. I don't
know how many different rules are being used to arrange things, but I
can't imagine how anyone could read C source code that was shown in such
fashion, especially since it's possible to have multiple permutations of
characters that appear absolutely indistinguishable, and things like
parentheses, brackets, greater-than signs, etc. sometimes get mirror-
imaged.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-03 19:02 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <aa131969-dade-41de-9c1f-692ef7a2edc2@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #77793 |
On Friday, December 4, 2015 at 1:14:53 AM UTC, supe...@casperkitty.com wrote:
>
> I have no idea whether such code would print the numbers in order but the
> Hebrew words backward, or the letters of the words in order but the numbers
> backward, or whether the numbers would get scrambled based upon whether
> they contain any digits a-f but I can't imagine anything good happening.
>
In modern Hebrew, numbers are written left-right, as in English.
The ancient Hebrews didn't use denary, of course, they had a system
whereby the letters have numerical values. There are 22 letters, so
going from 1 to 9, 10 to 100, and then up in hundreds brings you up
to four hundred. Then to get from 500 to 900 you use two or three
letter, then aleph (the first letter) is recycled to make 1000.
(Saul has killed his thousands, David his tens of thousands)
There are then special rules for fifteen and sixteen because they
would look like fragments of the ineffable name.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-04 06:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n3rc7l$eui$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #77793 |
supercat@casperkitty.com wrote:
(snip, I wrote)
>> Java source input is unicode, at least in theory, and all unicode
>> letters and, after the first letter, digits, are allowed in identifiers.
> How are things supposed to be displayed, either in source-code
> or generated output? For example, if one took a statement like:
Java doesn't care. I did wonder once, though, and found a free
downloadable Unicode editor. It has a choice of formats to save
the file, including one with \u.... escapes, so I used that one.
It might be that the compiler will accept UTF8, I didn't try.
Internally, Java char is unsigned 16 bits. I believe the usual I/O
system, at least for US Java converts to/from UTF8, but never tried.
> printf("version=%04x checksum=%04x");
> and replaced version with Hebrew [courtesy Google translate] "גִרְסָה" and
> checksum with "בדיקת", the code would then read:
> printf("גִרְסָה=%04x בדיקת=%04x");
As far as I know, everything is still left to right.
A fairly recent addition to Java is System.out.format, which allows for:
System.out.format("גִרְסָה=%04x בדיקת=%04x", version, checksum);
(I don't understand the formatting, but vim seems to understand
right to left. When I look at it, the x is not next to the 4,
but when I edit the cursor moves from the 4 to the x.
> I have no idea whether such code would print the numbers in order but the
> Hebrew words backward, or the letters of the words in order but the numbers
> backward, or whether the numbers would get scrambled based upon whether
> they contain any digits a-f but I can't imagine anything good happening.
Yes, you need an output device to do something other than ordinary ASCII.
I have only tried greek letters.
> FYI, one can play around with such things at http://jsfiddle.net/8k12dggb/
> if one goes to the box at the right and types something. The uppercase
> letters W, X, and Y will get replaced with Hebrew letters that look a little
> bit like those Latin ones, but the string rendering is bizarre. I don't
> know how many different rules are being used to arrange things, but I
> can't imagine how anyone could read C source code that was shown in such
> fashion, especially since it's possible to have multiple permutations of
> characters that appear absolutely indistinguishable, and things like
> parentheses, brackets, greater-than signs, etc. sometimes get mirror-
> imaged.
There are greek letters that look, in the usual font, the same as
some roman letters. I don't know so well how Unicode digits work, but
there are many more than 10 of them. Hebrew variable names could
be interesting.
-- glen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-28 05:11 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <st128blar76jcm47o85p659tuc64tchro0@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #77799 |
On Fri, 4 Dec 2015 06:35:33 +0000 (UTC), glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: > supercat@casperkitty.com wrote: > > (snip, I wrote) > > >> Java source input is unicode, at least in theory, and all unicode > >> letters and, after the first letter, digits, are allowed in identifiers. > [from upthread] > There are \uxxxx escapes to allow entering unicode characters, > and \uuxxxx escapes to escape a unicode escape. You can terminate > lines with \u000a and quote strings with \u0022. Actually you can terminate source line with any of: the actual CR character or its escape \u000d the actual LF character or its escape \u000a both, in that order Many people are familiar with LF and CRLF line termination, but fewer with CR. There was a question on stackexchange recently from a bewildered user of Eclipse which syntax-colored this // this is a comment \u000d do_something(); as a comment, but it nevertheless compiled to execute the call Remember ONLY \uxxxx (and \uu...) are handled before lexing. Java also supports most C-style escapes like \n \t \oct (and self-escape by doubling \\) in stringliteral and charliteral ONLY. > > How are things supposed to be displayed, either in source-code > > or generated output? For example, if one took a statement like: > > Java doesn't care. I did wonder once, though, and found a free > downloadable Unicode editor. It has a choice of formats to save > the file, including one with \u.... escapes, so I used that one. > > It might be that the compiler will accept UTF8, I didn't try. > javac is itself a Java program reading text(ish) files, and logically enough it supports the same encodings of the input (source) file as any other Java textish input if I specify -J-Dfile.encoding=cset. (-D is the JVM option to set a system property, and -J is Sun's convention for several tools to pass-through options to JVM.) > Internally, Java char is unsigned 16 bits. I believe the usual I/O > system, at least for US Java converts to/from UTF8, but never tried. > Java (runtime) I/O converts between 'byte's (in and from/to files, sockets, pipes, etc., also ByteArray's in memory) all handled by classes ending in Stream, and 'char's handled by classes (mostly) ending in Reader or Writer, using a java.nio.charset.Charset object, which defines the mapping or more generally encoding&decoding. UTF-8 is one available Charset out of over a hundred. The InputStreamReader and OutputStreamWriter constructors take an 'optional' Charset object or name (which it maps to an object); if you 'omit' it (rather, since Java doesn't actually do optional parameters, if you use the overload that doesn't have that parameter) it uses the JVM's default, which is platform-dependent, and AFAICT is always windows-1252 on Windows (unless you explicitly set system property file.encoding) but controlled by the usual LANG or LC_* envvars on Linux (and presumably Solaris, but I can't test that). <snip rest> Note that System.out is a PrintWriter and maps chars to bytes; System.in is an InputStream and returns bytes as-is, but is often wrapped in a Scanner that converts to chars and also does simple parsing, very roughly like [f][w]scanf with one %spec per call.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-04 10:24 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n3sek0$lqq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77793 |
On 03-Dec-15 19:14, supercat@casperkitty.com wrote:
> glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
>> Java source input is unicode, at least in theory, and all unicode
>> letters and, after the first letter, digits, are allowed in
>> identifiers.
>
> How are things supposed to be displayed, either in source-code or
> generated output? For example, if one took a statement like:
>
> printf("version=%04x checksum=%04x");
>
> and replaced version with Hebrew [courtesy Google translate]
> "גִרְסָה" and checksum with "בדיקת", the code would then read:
>
> printf("גִרְסָה=%04x בדיקת=%04x");
That's because "=%04" are weak LTR characters; in the presence of a
strong RTL character, they can reverse on display. "x" is a strong LTR
character, though, so it doesn't.
The actual bytes in the string don't reverse, though, so when printf()
replaces "%04x" with something else, the display order could be totally
different.
> I have no idea whether such code would print the numbers in order but
> the Hebrew words backward, or the letters of the words in order but
> the numbers backward, or whether the numbers would get scrambled
> based upon whether they contain any digits a-f but I can't imagine
> anything good happening.
"abcdef" are strong LTR characters, like "x", so their presence will
alter the display order of nearby digits.
This is one of those rare cases where a strong LTR mark should be used
to force the digits (and "=") to be LTR, overriding the nearby strong
RTL characters.
> I don't know how many different rules are being used to arrange
> things, but I can't imagine how anyone could read C source code that
> was shown in such fashion,
That's the price of allowing mixed scripts. There _are_ rules, but they
were designed for prose, not programming. Still, people who work with
mixed scripts regularly should understand what is happening.
My CPOE has developers all over the world, including in RTL countries,
and they _all_ use Latin script in source code; non-Latin scripts only
appear in the external files from translation bureaus. It's just easier
that way.
S
--
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-03 22:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <87k2ov40rq.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #77760 |
supercat@casperkitty.com writes: <snip> > Returning to the subject of C, to what extent are compilers expected to > understand Unicode? In identifiers, a C99 implementation must support universal character names (\uXXXX and \Uxxxxxxxx, but it's not specified what it has to so with them. It might, for example simply encode them in ASCII, but the purpose is to permit linkage with arbitrary names on systems where that's useful. You *could* use these to write identifiers like double \u03c0 = 3.14; but you'd need help from a user interface to make that in anyway usable. Also, implementations are permitted to allow multibyte characters in identifiers, though which ones and what they mean in left entirely up to the implementation. <snip> -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-04 11:32 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n3rq04$3mo$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77778 |
On 03/12/15 23:37, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > supercat@casperkitty.com writes: > <snip> >> Returning to the subject of C, to what extent are compilers expected to >> understand Unicode? > > In identifiers, a C99 implementation must support universal character > names (\uXXXX and \Uxxxxxxxx, but it's not specified what it has to so > with them. It might, for example simply encode them in ASCII, but the > purpose is to permit linkage with arbitrary names on systems where > that's useful. > > You *could* use these to write identifiers like double \u03c0 = 3.14; > but you'd need help from a user interface to make that in anyway > usable. llvm allows "double π = 3.14;", but gcc requires you to write it as \u03c0 in an identifier. It is quite happy with utf8 in strings and printouts - at least on my Linux system. I don't know about other compilers, but at the moment, I think using \u characters in identifiers, and certainly using raw utf-8 characters, should probably be considered compiler specific. Even though \uXXXX identifiers are in C99, many compilers don't support them. > > Also, implementations are permitted to allow multibyte characters in > identifiers, though which ones and what they mean in left entirely up to > the implementation. > > <snip> >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-02 11:10 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n3n8h2$heb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77631 |
On 02-Dec-15 10:18, Malcolm McLean wrote: > UTF-8 is the best compromise. But there are some problem that are > very hard to avoid., like supporting archaic ash and thorn in English > (mediaeval, ye olde coffee shoppe), when half the population think > the latter is a y as in yellow. What problems? wynn Ƿ ƿ thorn Þ þ eth Ð ð ash Æ æ ethel Œ œ yogh Ȝ ȝ ond ⁊ This message is encoded in UTF-8, and unless your system doesn't have any fonts with the proper glyphs (unlikely), you should see them fine. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-02 09:24 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <abbfee17-9070-4e4a-9c45-2f14c39fe021@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #77638 |
W dniu środa, 2 grudnia 2015 18:10:19 UTC+1 użytkownik Stephen Sprunk napisał: > On 02-Dec-15 10:18, Malcolm McLean wrote: > > UTF-8 is the best compromise. But there are some problem that are > > very hard to avoid., like supporting archaic ash and thorn in English > > (mediaeval, ye olde coffee shoppe), when half the population think > > the latter is a y as in yellow. > > What problems? > > wynn Ƿ ƿ > thorn Þ þ > eth Ð ð > ash Æ æ > ethel Œ œ > yogh Ȝ ȝ > ond ⁊ > in google groups all okay except 'ond' which presents one small common 'empty square' sign
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-02 13:10 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n3nfi7$f1k$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77641 |
On 02-Dec-15 11:24, fir wrote: > Stephen Sprunk napisał: >> On 02-Dec-15 10:18, Malcolm McLean wrote: >>> UTF-8 is the best compromise. But there are some problem that >>> are very hard to avoid., like supporting archaic ash and thorn in >>> English (mediaeval, ye olde coffee shoppe), when half the >>> population think the latter is a y as in yellow. >> >> What problems? >> >> wynn Ƿ ƿ >> thorn Þ þ >> eth Ð ð >> ash Æ æ >> ethel Œ œ >> yogh Ȝ ȝ >> ond ⁊ >> > in google groups all okay except 'ond' which presents one small > common 'empty square' sign That's a font problem on your system, not a UTF-8 problem. The ond appears via Google Groups in Chrome, Firefox and MSIE on my system, as well as via my normal newsreader. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BartC <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-02 19:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n3nhji$nbr$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77647 |
On 02/12/2015 19:10, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> On 02-Dec-15 11:24, fir wrote:
>> Stephen Sprunk napisał:
>>> On 02-Dec-15 10:18, Malcolm McLean wrote:
>>>> UTF-8 is the best compromise. But there are some problem that
>>>> are very hard to avoid., like supporting archaic ash and thorn in
>>>> English (mediaeval, ye olde coffee shoppe), when half the
>>>> population think the latter is a y as in yellow.
>>>
>>> What problems?
>>>
>>> wynn Ƿ ƿ
>>> thorn Þ þ
>>> eth Ð ð
>>> ash Æ æ
>>> ethel Œ œ
>>> yogh Ȝ ȝ
>>> ond ⁊
>>>
>> in google groups all okay except 'ond' which presents one small
>> common 'empty square' sign
>
> That's a font problem on your system, not a UTF-8 problem. The ond
> appears via Google Groups in Chrome, Firefox and MSIE on my system, as
> well as via my normal newsreader.
I can see the ond above (assuming it's supposed to look like a '7'). But
if I view the message source (in Thunderbird), then those special
characters get broken up, into something like:
ond âŠ
('ond' followed by 3 funny characters, but I can't see the middle one in
this post.)
Also, if I copy the above text, and paste it into MS Word, then the ond
is displayed as a square.
--
Bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-03 09:08 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <dc91eoFi96mU5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #77653 |
BartC wrote:
> On 02/12/2015 19:10, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>> On 02-Dec-15 11:24, fir wrote:
>>> Stephen Sprunk napisał:
>>>> On 02-Dec-15 10:18, Malcolm McLean wrote:
>>>>> UTF-8 is the best compromise. But there are some problem that
>>>>> are very hard to avoid., like supporting archaic ash and thorn in
>>>>> English (mediaeval, ye olde coffee shoppe), when half the
>>>>> population think the latter is a y as in yellow.
>>>>
>>>> What problems?
>>>>
>>>> wynn Ƿ ƿ
>>>> thorn Þ þ
>>>> eth Ð ð
>>>> ash Æ æ
>>>> ethel Œ œ
>>>> yogh Ȝ ȝ
>>>> ond ⁊
>>>>
>>> in google groups all okay except 'ond' which presents one small
>>> common 'empty square' sign
>>
>> That's a font problem on your system, not a UTF-8 problem. The ond
>> appears via Google Groups in Chrome, Firefox and MSIE on my system, as
>> well as via my normal newsreader.
>
> I can see the ond above (assuming it's supposed to look like a '7'). But
> if I view the message source (in Thunderbird), then those special
> characters get broken up, into something like:
>
> ond âŠ
>
> ('ond' followed by 3 funny characters, but I can't see the middle one in
> this post.)
>
> Also, if I copy the above text, and paste it into MS Word, then the ond
> is displayed as a square.
Then your system has a problem (missing font?), not the encoding.
--
Ian Collins
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-02 14:10 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n3nj2e$tos$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77653 |
On 02-Dec-15 13:45, BartC wrote:
> On 02/12/2015 19:10, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>> On 02-Dec-15 11:24, fir wrote:
>>> Stephen Sprunk napisał:
>>>> wynn Ƿ ƿ
>>>> thorn Þ þ
>>>> eth Ð ð
>>>> ash Æ æ
>>>> ethel Œ œ
>>>> yogh Ȝ ȝ
>>>> ond ⁊
>>>>
>>> in google groups all okay except 'ond' which presents one small
>>> common 'empty square' sign
>>
>> That's a font problem on your system, not a UTF-8 problem. The
>> ond appears via Google Groups in Chrome, Firefox and MSIE on my
>> system, as well as via my normal newsreader.
>
> I can see the ond above (assuming it's supposed to look like a '7').
It's roughly the same shape but the horizontal is at the x-height and
the diagonal is a descender, i.e. extends below the baseline.
Some fonts render the descending part as a vertical tail, and some have
a second, shorter horizontal through the diagonal. Both are accepted
stylistic variations, same as sometimes seen with a 7. There are
similar variations for
> But if I view the message source (in Thunderbird), then those
> special characters get broken up, into something like:
>
> ond âŠ
>
> ('ond' followed by 3 funny characters, but I can't see the middle one
> in this post.)
Ditto, so I'm guessing that window uses the default code page of the
locale rather than the one indicated in the headers. And Windows won't
let you set UTF-8 as your default code page--period.
> Also, if I copy the above text, and paste it into MS Word, then the
> ond is displayed as a square.
That's odd; it works for me. In fact, I copy-and-pasted all of the
above characters from my browser into the compose window, so it's not a
generic UTF-8 clipboard problem (though the clipboard does often have
problems with non-BMP characters due to UCS-2/UTF-16 glitches).
S
--
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-02 11:27 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <lnk2owslai.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #77638 |
Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> writes:
> On 02-Dec-15 10:18, Malcolm McLean wrote:
>> UTF-8 is the best compromise. But there are some problem that are
>> very hard to avoid., like supporting archaic ash and thorn in English
>> (mediaeval, ye olde coffee shoppe), when half the population think
>> the latter is a y as in yellow.
>
> What problems?
>
> wynn Ƿ ƿ
> thorn Þ þ
> eth Ð ð
> ash Æ æ
> ethel Œ œ
> yogh Ȝ ȝ
> ond ⁊
>
> This message is encoded in UTF-8, and unless your system doesn't have
> any fonts with the proper glyphs (unlikely), you should see them fine.
That last one is U+204A, "TIRONIAN SIGN ET". There doesn't appear to be
anything in Unicode called "ond".
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-02 15:21 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n3nn8j$g83$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #77650 |
On 02-Dec-15 13:27, Keith Thompson wrote:
> Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> writes:
>> ond ⁊
>
> That last one is U+204A, "TIRONIAN SIGN ET". There doesn't appear
> to be anything in Unicode called "ond".
Same thing.
"&" ("and", not "ampersand") was also considered a letter around the
same time, as were other letters that disappeared, merged with others,
evolved into digraphs/trigraphs or are now considered ligatures or
non-letters. OTOH, the ligature "W" became a distinct letter, and "I"
begot "J".
S
--
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-02 15:18 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ln37vksamg.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #77666 |
Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> writes:
> On 02-Dec-15 13:27, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> writes:
>>> ond ⁊
>>
>> That last one is U+204A, "TIRONIAN SIGN ET". There doesn't appear
>> to be anything in Unicode called "ond".
>
> Same thing.
>
> "&" ("and", not "ampersand") was also considered a letter around the
> same time, as were other letters that disappeared, merged with others,
> evolved into digraphs/trigraphs or are now considered ligatures or
> non-letters. OTOH, the ligature "W" became a distinct letter, and "I"
> begot "J".
"TIRONIAN" apparently refers to Tironian shorthand, invented over 2000
years ago and attributed to Cicero's scribe Marcus Tullius Tiro. The
"TIRONIAN SIGN ET" is the main survivor, and the only one included in
standard Unicode.
A Tironian "et" between words in Old English would be pronounced "ond".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tironian_notes
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-04 12:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <566189f1.9052609@news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #77679 |
Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> wrote:
> Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> writes:
> > On 02-Dec-15 13:27, Keith Thompson wrote:
> >> Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> writes:
> >>> ond ⁊
> >>
> >> That last one is U+204A, "TIRONIAN SIGN ET". There doesn't appear
> >> to be anything in Unicode called "ond".
> >
> > Same thing.
> >
> > "&" ("and", not "ampersand") was also considered a letter around the
> > same time, as were other letters that disappeared, merged with others,
> > evolved into digraphs/trigraphs or are now considered ligatures or
> > non-letters. OTOH, the ligature "W" became a distinct letter, and "I"
> > begot "J".
>
> "TIRONIAN" apparently refers to Tironian shorthand, invented over 2000
> years ago and attributed to Cicero's scribe Marcus Tullius Tiro. The
> "TIRONIAN SIGN ET" is the main survivor, and the only one included in
> standard Unicode.
It's still used in Irish (and you can still see it there on signs and
drain covers), so there is more of a justification for calling it agus.
Richard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web