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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #52396 > unrolled thread

Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List?

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

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List? Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2013-08-11 19:26 -0600
    Re: Could you verify this,   Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List? Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2013-08-12 17:54 +1200
      Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-08-13 02:54 +0100
      Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List? Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2013-08-12 19:48 -0600
      Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List? Jason Friedman <jsf80238@gmail.com> - 2013-08-12 21:20 -0600
      Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List? MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2013-08-13 04:32 +0100
      Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-08-13 09:14 +0100
      RE: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List? "Prasad, Ramit" <ramit.prasad@jpmorgan.com.dmarc.invalid> - 2013-08-13 15:34 +0000
        Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List? Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2013-08-14 06:36 +0000

#52396 — Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List?

On 08/11/2013 09:34 AM, MRAB wrote:
> If twitter counts characters, not codepoints, you could then ask
> whether it passes the codepoints through as given. If it does, then you
> experiment to see how much data you could send encoded as a sequence of
> combining codepoints. (You might want to check the Term of Use first,
> though! :-))

I've always wondered if the 160 character limit or whatever it is is a
hard limit in their system, or if it's just a variable they could tweak
if they felt like it.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#52405 — Re: Could you verify this, Oh Great Unicode Experts of the Python-List?

Michael Torrie wrote:
> I've always wondered if the 160 character limit or whatever it is is a
> hard limit in their system, or if it's just a variable they could tweak
> if they felt like it.

Isn't it for compatibility with SMS? Twitter could
probably change it, but persuading all the cell phone
networks to change at the same time might be rather
difficult.

-- 
Greg

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

#52432

On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 2:48 AM, Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/11/2013 11:54 PM, Gregory Ewing wrote:
>> Michael Torrie wrote:
>>> I've always wondered if the 160 character limit or whatever it is is a
>>> hard limit in their system, or if it's just a variable they could tweak
>>> if they felt like it.
>>
>> Isn't it for compatibility with SMS? Twitter could
>> probably change it, but persuading all the cell phone
>> networks to change at the same time might be rather
>> difficult.
>
> Yes I think you're correct about it being limited for SMS.
>
> However I know of no phone or network that won't let you use longer
> messages; multiple SMS packets are used and most phone paste them back
> together.  So no there's nothing that anyone needs to change to use
> longer messages if they so chose.  It's now just an arbitrary limit,
> part of the twitter culture.

It's unlikely to be changed; the limit demands brevity. 160 may be
arbitrary now, but without strong argument for another cutoff, there's
no reason to alter it.

And that's my response, in 160 characters. :)

ChrisA

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

#52433

On 08/11/2013 11:54 PM, Gregory Ewing wrote:
> Michael Torrie wrote:
>> I've always wondered if the 160 character limit or whatever it is is a
>> hard limit in their system, or if it's just a variable they could tweak
>> if they felt like it.
> 
> Isn't it for compatibility with SMS? Twitter could
> probably change it, but persuading all the cell phone
> networks to change at the same time might be rather
> difficult.

Yes I think you're correct about it being limited for SMS.

However I know of no phone or network that won't let you use longer
messages; multiple SMS packets are used and most phone paste them back
together.  So no there's nothing that anyone needs to change to use
longer messages if they so chose.  It's now just an arbitrary limit,
part of the twitter culture.

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

#52435

>>> I've always wondered if the 160 character limit or whatever it is is a
>>> hard limit in their system, or if it's just a variable they could tweak
>>> if they felt like it.

I thought it was 140 characters?
https://twitter.com/about

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

#52437

On 13/08/2013 04:20, Jason Friedman wrote:
>>>> I've always wondered if the 160 character limit or whatever it is is a
>>>> hard limit in their system, or if it's just a variable they could tweak
>>>> if they felt like it.
>
> I thought it was 140 characters?
> https://twitter.com/about
>
He did say "or whatever". :-)

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

#52443

On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 4:32 AM, MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> wrote:
> On 13/08/2013 04:20, Jason Friedman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I've always wondered if the 160 character limit or whatever it is is a
>>>>> hard limit in their system, or if it's just a variable they could tweak
>>>>> if they felt like it.
>>
>>
>> I thought it was 140 characters?
>> https://twitter.com/about
>>
> He did say "or whatever". :-)

I don't personally use the service, so I just followed the figure that
people were bandying about in this thread. 140 it is, then.

ChrisA

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

#52463

Michael Torrie wrote:
> On 08/11/2013 11:54 PM, Gregory Ewing wrote:
> > Michael Torrie wrote:
> >> I've always wondered if the 160 character limit or whatever it is is a
> >> hard limit in their system, or if it's just a variable they could tweak
> >> if they felt like it.
> >
> > Isn't it for compatibility with SMS? Twitter could
> > probably change it, but persuading all the cell phone
> > networks to change at the same time might be rather
> > difficult.
> 
> Yes I think you're correct about it being limited for SMS.
> 
> However I know of no phone or network that won't let you use longer
> messages; multiple SMS packets are used and most phone paste them back
> together.  So no there's nothing that anyone needs to change to use
> longer messages if they so chose.  It's now just an arbitrary limit,
> part of the twitter culture.


True, but order of delivery is not guaranteed. I still sometimes
get out of order text message when multiple messages are sent
at once.


~Ramit



This email is confidential and subject to important disclaimers and conditions including on offers for the purchase or sale of securities, accuracy and completeness of information, viruses, confidentiality, legal privilege, and legal entity disclaimers, available at http://www.jpmorgan.com/pages/disclosures/email.  

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

#52498

On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 15:34:45 +0000, Prasad, Ramit wrote:

> Michael Torrie wrote:
[...]
>> However I know of no phone or network that won't let you use longer
>> messages; multiple SMS packets are used and most phone paste them back
>> together.  So no there's nothing that anyone needs to change to use
>> longer messages if they so chose.  It's now just an arbitrary limit,
>> part of the twitter culture.
> 
> 
> True, but order of delivery is not guaranteed. I still sometimes get out
> of order text message when multiple messages are sent at once.

SMS delivery is not guaranteed *at all*. It's a best-effort delivery 
service, which means the telco can drop any SMSes it feels like, for any 
reason it likes, without notice or notification.



-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web