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

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #25965

Re: Why No Supplemental Characters In Character Literals?

Show all headers | View raw

On 06-02-2011 00:36, Ken Wesson wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Feb 2011 13:33:32 -0500, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 05-02-2011 01:15, Ken Wesson wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>> Not really.
>
> Optimization: making something better.
>
> suggests
>
> Micro-optimization: making some tiny bit of something (a single loop, a
> single algorithm or data structure) better.

That is what the words means.

But among programmers it has gotten a slightly different meaning.

> No doubt the latter can carry connotations, including negative
> (optimizing a tiny bit of something without considering the forest, only
> the trees), in certain contexts, but the post that first used the term in
> this thread did not IMO clearly convey any such subtext.

It seems rather clear to me that Mike's usage had the programmer
meaning not the English meaning in mind.

Arne

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