Re: unicode in ruby
- From: "Michal Suchanek" <hramrach@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 22:07:21 +0900
On 3/10/06, Austin Ziegler <halostatue@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 3/8/06, Richard Gyger <richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
so, you guys are telling me a language developed since the year 2000
doesn't support unicode strings natively? in my opinion, that's a
pretty glaring problem.
Please note that Ruby itself is ten years old. Unicode has only
*recently* (the last three or four years, with the release of Windows
XP) become a major factor, especially in Japan. Unix support for Unicode
is still in the stone ages because of the nonsense that POSIX put on
Unix ages ago. (When Unix filesystems can write UTF-16 as their native
filename format, then we're going to be much better. That will, however,
break some assumptions by really stupid programs.)
Why the hell utf-16? It is no longer compatible with ascii, yet 16
bits are far from sufficient to cover current unicode. So you still
get multiword characters. It is not even dword aligned for fast
processing by current cpus.
I would like utf-8 for compatibility, and utf-32 for easy string
processing. But I do not see much use for utf-16.
Thanks
Michal
--
Support the freedom of music!
Maybe it's a weird genre .. but weird is *not* illegal.
Maybe next time they will send a special forces commando
to your picnic .. because they think you are weird.
www.music-versus-guns.org http://en.policejnistat.cz
- References:
- unicode in ruby
- From: Richard Gyger
- Re: unicode in ruby
- From: Michal Suchanek
- Re: unicode in ruby
- From: Une bévue
- Re: unicode in ruby
- From: Richard Gyger
- Re: unicode in ruby
- From: Austin Ziegler
- unicode in ruby
- Prev by Date: Re: Software Carpentry (Version 955)
- Next by Date: Net::HTTP.get_response fails
- Previous by thread: Re: unicode in ruby
- Next by thread: Re: unicode in ruby
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
