Larry Wall wrote:
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 03:30:02AM -0800, Darren Duncan wrote:
What's with this NFG / Normal Form G that you refer to? I don't see any
mention of that in http://unicode.org/reports/tr15/ ... did you mean NFC?
Nope, this is a Perl/Parrot idea. It started out with a notion of
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 10:28:43AM -0800, Geoffrey Broadwell wrote:
: On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 08:12 +0100, pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl wrote:
: > @@ -103,7 +106,7 @@
: > =item *
: >
: > POD sections may be used reliably as multiline comments in Perl 6.
: > -Unlike in Perl 5, POD syntax now requ
On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 08:12 +0100, pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl wrote:
> @@ -103,7 +106,7 @@
> =item *
>
> POD sections may be used reliably as multiline comments in Perl 6.
> -Unlike in Perl 5, POD syntax now requires that C<=begin comment>
> +Unlike in Perl 5, POD syntax now lets you use C<=
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 03:30:02AM -0800, Darren Duncan wrote:
> pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl wrote:
>> In the abstract, Perl is written in Unicode, and has consistent Unicode
>> -semantics regardless of the underlying text representations.
>> +semantics regardless of the underlying text represen
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 6:30 AM, Darren Duncan wrote:
> pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl wrote:
>>
>> By default Perl presents Unicode in "NFG" formation, where each grapheme
>> counts as
>> one character. A grapheme is what the novice user would think of as a
>> character in their normal everyday
pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl wrote:
In the abstract, Perl is written in Unicode, and has consistent Unicode
-semantics regardless of the underlying text representations.
+semantics regardless of the underlying text representations. By default
+Perl presents Unicode in "NFG" formation, where ea
