On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 10:39 PM, Terry Reedy <tjreedy at udel.edu> wrote: > On 9/8/2011 6:15 PM, fwierzbicki at gmail.com wrote: >> >> Oops, forgot to add the link for the gory details for Java and> 2 byte >> unicode: >> >> http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/Intl/Supplementary/ > > This is dated 2004. Basically, they considered several options, tried out 4, > and ended up sticking with char[] (sequences) as UTF-16 with char = 16 bit > code unit and added 32-bit Character(int) class for low-level manipulation > of code points. > > I did not see the indexing problem mentioned. I get the impression that they > encourage sequence forward-backward iteration (cursor-based access) rather > than random-access indexing. Hmmm, sorry for the irrelevant link - my lack of expertise here is showing. What I do know is that we (meaning Jim Baker) are taking great pains to always use codepoints even for random access in our unicode code. I can't speak to the performance implications without some deeper study into what Jim has done. -Frank
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