> From: martin@v.loewis.de > Jeff Hobbs writes: > > > Can someone explain to me why moving to UCS-4 is a good thing? > > Because it simplifies processing of non-BMP characters, as it restores > the property that you get one Unicode character per string index. ... > > While Tcl is agnostic about non-BMP chars (all 2 of them ... ha ha), > > it does have correct UCS-4 support (not completely though with how > > RedHat patched it). This has been discussed before briefly here: > > > > > https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=578030&group_id=10894&atid= 110894 > > Which of the follow-up messages do you consider reliable information > in this report? davygrvy comments appear to be irrelevant, as they > talk about Unicode 3.0, keithp likewise. Your own comment appears to > talk about possible future changes, instead of the current code. BTW, I mentioned this because I'm not sure that the reasoning behind moving to a 32-bit integral type was due to RHs desire to support the extra chars in Unicode 4 (after all, without shipping fonts to display them ... what's the point?). Keith Packard, who submitted the bug report (RFE really) is one of the major XFree maintainers (err ... I guess that's xwin now). In any case, he wanted to allow 32-bit in X in part for ease of processing, advantages of word alignment, and other things. IOW, I'm not really sure that this was all done to support UCS-4 specifically, although that may have been a consideration. Jeff Hobbs The Tcl Guy Senior Developer http://www.ActiveState.com/
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4