[lkml]   [1998]   [Apr]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: unicode (char as abstract data type) (Alex Belits)  wrote on 17.04.98 in <>:

> On Sat, 18 Apr 1998, Martin Mares wrote:

> > No, it just solves the storage and visual representation part of the
> > problem and leaves the rest to the others.
> ...while after all necessary meta-information about language context is
> gone, and there is no way to recover it except by guessing (one charset

"Is gone"? It never was there to begin with. *No* character set that I
have ever heard of has language labelling, so don't blame Unicode for not
having it either.

Most people bashing Unicode seem to do so for two extremely moronic

* It's not a simple 8 bit character set. This is work!

Well duh, there's more than 256 characters around. You _can't_ do this
with a simple 8 bit character set. And if you want to see a really ugly
solution, look at ISO 2022 - the "just give up" solution.

* It doesn't solve problem X that no other character set solves either.

Well duh. Quelle surprise. What else is new?

MfG Kai

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:42    [W:0.049 / U:3.264 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site