Am I wrong to think that UTF8 should be THE
standard? I believe it can encode anything
encoded by other encodings.
All the UTF-* encodings can encode the same code points. There are
different trade offs though.
Can't we consider non-utf8 text as legacy?
I don't like that word, but I do
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 17:38 -0200, Maurício wrote:
(...) When it's phrased as truncates to 8
bits it sounds so simple, surely all we need
to do is not truncate to 8 bits right?
The problem is, what encoding should it pick?
UTF8, 16, 32, EBDIC? (...)
One sensible suggestion
Duncan Coutts wrote:
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 17:38 -0200, Maurício wrote:
(...) When it's phrased as truncates to 8
bits it sounds so simple, surely all we need
to do is not truncate to 8 bits right?
The problem is, what encoding should it pick?
UTF8, 16, 32, EBDIC? (...)
One
On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 13:05 +, Jules Bean wrote:
Language of messages is quite different from language of a file you read.
Suppose I am English, and I have a russian friend, Vlad.
My default locale is, say, latin-1, and his is something cyrillic.
I might well open files including my
by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
11/29/2007 07:44 AM
To
Maurício [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc
haskell-cafe@haskell.org
Subject
Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Strings and utf-8
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 17:38 -0200, Maurício wrote:
(...) When it's phrased as truncates to 8
bits it sounds so simple, surely all we need
Thomas Hartman wrote:
A translation of
http://www.ahinea.com/en/tech/perl-unicode-struggle.html
from perl to haskell would be a very useful piece of documentation, I
think.
Perl encodes both Unicode and binary data as the same (dynamic) data
type. Haskell - at least in theory - has two
