On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Eric Covener <cove...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:07 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > > Well, we are sorting the entire ASCII so I guess we can drop "for > > alpha-numerics only". > > Maybe it was fixed and I missed it, but didn't you point > out that [] were not sorted right relative to alphas per > POSIX strcasecmp? > I was pointing out that most implementations sort [] in between upper and lower case letters, and in the string-folded ordering, all characters are treated as their lower case equivalent for collation. Unsure how POSIX defined this. The EBCDIC ordering table used the same lower-case folding as ASCII, so the sortation of all POSIX characters will be identical between our EBCDIC (extended) and ASCII implementations. [I only just realized that original EBCDIC didn't include all the C characters, I only used the code page for 15 years for document imaging but always coded in ANSI :-]
