On Tue, 08 Jul 2014 17:27:27 +0400 Yaroslav Tsarko <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 08.07.2014 16:40, Mario Domenech Goulart wrote: > >> On the other hand, we risk breaking eggs that operate on latin1 >> text. UTF-8 support may also affect performance-sensitive code. > > Isn`t UTF-8 backward-compatible with Latin-1 and ASCII encodings? > AFAIR UTF-8 is the best choice for software which operates on one-byte > ASCII/Latin1 strings. They are compatible only in the 7-bit ASCII range. The remaining bit in the byte makes the whole difference. :-) In UTF-8 it means either "here's your 8-bit character" or "look at the next byte". In latin1 it always means "here's your 8-bit character". Best wishes. Mario -- http://parenteses.org/mario _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
