On Thursday, 2 June 2016 at 20:36:12 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 06/02/2016 04:33 PM, ag0aep6g wrote:
Operating on code points by default is seen as not
particularly useful.
By whom? The "support level 1" folks yonder at the Unicode
standard? :o) -- Andrei
From the standard:
Level 1 support works well in many circumstances. However, it
does not handle more complex languages or extensions to the
Unicode Standard very well. Particularly important cases are
surrogates, canonical equivalence, word boundaries, grapheme
boundaries, and loose matches. (For more information about
boundary conditions, see The Unicode Standard, Section 5-15.)
Level 2 support matches much more what user expectations are
for sequences of Unicode characters. It is still locale
independent and easily implementable. However, the
implementation may be slower when supporting Level 2, and some
expressions may require Level 1 matches. Thus it is usually
required to have some sort of syntax that will turn Level 2
support on and off.
That doesn't sound like much of an endorsement for defaulting to
only level 1 support to me - "it does not handle more complex
languages or extensions to the Unicode Standard very well".
