The first message had many of the following characters viewable in my telnet window, but the repost introduced a 0xC2 prefix to the 0xA7 character.
I have this feeling that many people would vote against posting all these funny characters, as is does make reading the perl6 mailing lists difficult in some contexts. Ever since introducing these UTF-8 > 127 characters into this mailing list, I can never be sure of what the posting author intended to send. I'm all for supporting UTF-8 characters in strings, and perhaps even in variable names but to we really have to have perl6 programs with core operators in UTF-8. I'd like to see all the perl6 code that had UTF-8 operators start with use non_portable_utf8_operators. As it stands now, I'm going to have to find new tools for my linux platform that has been performing fine since 1995 (perl5.9 still supports libc5!), and I don't yet know how I am going to be able to telnet in from win98, and I'll bet that the dos kermit that I use when I dial up won't support UTF-8 characters either. David ps. I just read how many people will need to upgrade their operating systems if the want to upgrade to MS Word11. Do we want to require operating system and/or many support tools to be upgraded before we can share perl6 scripts via email? On Tue, 5 Nov 2002 at 09:56 -0800, Michael Lazzaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > Code Symbol Comment > > 167 § Could be used > > 169 © Could be used > > 171 « May well be used > > 172 ¬ "Not"? > > 174 ® Could be used > > 176 ° Could be used > > 177 ± Introduces an interesting level of uncertainty? Useable > > 181 µ Could be used > > 182 ¶ Could be used > > 186 º Could be used (but I dislike it as it is alphabetic) > > 187 » May well be used > > 191 ¿ Could be used
