Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #25915

Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals?

From	Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com>
Subject	Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals?
Newsgroups	comp.lang.java.programmer
References	<iig4k2$sus$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> <iig6j2$dul$2@news.albasani.net> <iig84e$uqu$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> <iigcva$90q$1@news.eternal-september.org> <iihufd$ulm$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> <iii493$nn8$1@news.eternal-september.org> <iii64u$nji$1@news.eternal-september.org> <4d4ca055$0$23765$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <iii7jc$ssv$1@news.eternal-september.org> <4d4cc253$1@news.x-privat.org> <4d4cc43d$0$23765$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <4d4cc888$1@news.x-privat.org> <iiio8g$lcp$1@news.eternal-september.org>
MIME-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding	8bit
NNTP-Posting-Host	$$-cwgml$lsc2q.news.x-privat.org
Message-ID	<4d4ceaf3$1@news.x-privat.org> (permalink)
Date	5 Feb 2011 07:15:15 +0100
Organization	X-Privat.Org NNTP Server - http://www.x-privat.org
Lines	35
X-Authenticated-User	$$o-16a0wpsuhxkoyemw
X-Complaints-To	abuse@x-privat.org
Path	csiph.com!eeepc.pasdenom.info!news.pasdenom.info!news.dougwise.org!feed.ac-versailles.fr!usenet-fr.net!gegeweb.org!newsfeed.x-privat.org!x-privat.org!not-for-mail
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:25915

Show key headers only | View raw

On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 21:46:56 -0800, Mike Schilling wrote:

> "Ken Wesson" <kwesson@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4d4cc888$1@news.x-privat.org...
>> On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 22:30:09 -0500, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>
>>> On 04-02-2011 22:21, Ken Wesson wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 17:02:37 -0800, Mike Schilling wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Arne Vajhøj"<arne@vajhoej.dk>  wrote in message
>>>>> news:4d4ca055$0$23765$14726298@news.sunsite.dk...
>>>>>> Which is a bit surprising since high code points were introduced
>>>>>> when .NET came around.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But they probably had a compatibility issue with p/Invoke and Win32
>>>>>> API, COM interop, C++ mixed mode etc. that all had to work with
>>>>>> existing Win32 model of 16 bit wchars.
>>>>>
>>>>> Or, relentless micro-optimizers that they are, Microsoft wasn't
>>>>> willing to bite off the size/performance issues.
>>>>
>>>> Relentless micro-optimizers of what, their cashflow?
>>>
>>> Micro optimization in the meaning it has among programmers.
>>
>> Microsoft doesn't know beans about optimizing program code, as anyone
>> who's waited five mintues for Windows to start up and become fully
>> responsive can attest. :)
> 
> Optimization and micro-optimization are not synonyms.

No; the latter is a special case of the former.

So?

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-04 22:30 -0500
  Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-07 19:16 -0500
  Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 18:26 -0500
  Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-06 11:15 -0500
    Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-07 04:15 +0100
      Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-02-06 20:53 -0800
  Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-05 07:15 +0100
    Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 09:25 -0500
  Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-05 04:48 +0100
    Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals? "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-02-04 21:46 -0800

csiph-web