Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #25949
| From | Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? |
| Date | 2011-02-04 12:43 -0800 |
| Organization | http://groups.google.com |
| Message-ID | <3d596509-61c1-42f5-a311-8fabd22998fd@o18g2000prh.googlegroups.com> (permalink) |
| References | <iig4k2$sus$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> <iig6j2$dul$2@news.albasani.net> <iig84e$uqu$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> |
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> Why was it decreed in the language spec that characters beyond U+FFFF are
>>> not allowed in character literals, when they are allowed everywhere else
>>> (in string literals, in the program text, in character and string values
>>> etc)?
>
Lew wrote:
>> Because a 'char' type holds only 16 bits.
>
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> No it doesn’t. Otherwise you wouldn’t be allowed supplementary characters in
> character and string values. Which you are.
>
/* DemoChar */
package eg;
public class DemoChar
{
public static void main( String [] args )
{
System.out.println( "Character.MAX_VALUE + 1 = "
+ (Character.MAX_VALUE + 1) );
char foo1, foo2;
foo1 = (char) (Character.MAX_VALUE - 1);
foo2 = (char) (foo1 / 2);
System.out.println( "foo1 = "+ (int) foo1 +", foo2 = "+ (int)
foo2 );
foo1 = '§';
foo2 = '@';
char sum = (char) (foo1 + foo2);
System.out.println( "foo1 + foo2 = "+ sum );
}
}
--
Lew
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-04 19:59 +1300
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-02-04 17:02 -0800
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-05 04:21 +0100
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-04 19:05 -0500
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-04 19:56 -0500
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-02-04 16:37 -0800
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-02-04 00:22 -0800
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-02-04 15:03 -0800
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-04 18:04 -0500
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-04 07:49 -0500
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-05 11:26 +1300
Re: Efficient unicode string implementation was: Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-04 19:13 -0500
Re: Efficient unicode string implementation was: Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-04 20:08 -0500
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte.net.invalid> - 2011-02-04 18:37 +0100
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? markspace <nospam@nowhere.com> - 2011-02-04 11:27 -0800
Re: Efficient unicode string implementation was: Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-04 17:28 -0500
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-02-04 09:10 -0800
Re: Efficient unicode string implementation was: Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-02-04 15:22 -0800
Re: Efficient unicode string implementation was: Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-04 18:41 -0500
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-04 18:12 -0500
Efficient unicode string implementation was: Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-02-04 21:30 +0000
Re: Efficient unicode string implementation was: Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-05 04:25 +0100
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-04 12:33 -0500
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-04 13:44 -0500
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-02-04 15:08 -0800
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-04 12:43 -0800
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-04 10:49 -0500
Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-04 08:04 -0500
csiph-web