On 27.01.2016 20:56, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 6:29 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com > <mailto:j...@jagunet.com>> wrote: > > > > On Jan 27, 2016, at 4:44 AM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org > <mailto:br...@apache.org>> wrote: > > > > > > Hmph, it's concise, not confusing. Subversion's APIs expect all > strings > > to be encoded in UTF-8, so the docstring can't just say > > "case-insensitive" because that would be extremely misleading in > that > > context. > > > > APR makes no promises about the encoding, but mentioning that these > > functions are designed to work with the ASCII subset (or EBCDIC > > equivalent of same) would be quite important, I think? > > I have no idea how encoding matters at all to the meaning > of case sensitivity... unless, somehow, 'A' and 'a' are > encoded to the exact same value. > > In pretty much every description of string and character > comparison functions I've ever encountered, the terms "case > sensitive", "case insensitive" or "ignoring case" have all > been used to describe whether or not the function considers > the case of the character when doing the comparison. I've > never seen one use the phrase 'case-equivalent' which implies > the exact opposite of what it actually does. > > > I committed a fix I like but am still open to edits. > > Stating that equivalent-case are treated as equal states that the > code points "A"-"Z" are all treated as equal, and "a"-"z" are all > treated as equal (and "A" and "a" would be treated as unique > of one another) LOL
I guess we're using different meanings of the term 'equivalence group.' Doesn't really matter as long as the behaviour is correct. Since we also spell 'behaviour' differently, it's not surprising that we're talking past each other. Not the same language, y'know; wrong locale. :) -- Brane
