On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:16:44 -0600 Kenneth Marshall <k...@rice.edu> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 10:09:16PM +0100, Stevan Baji?? wrote: > > On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 14:29:53 -0600 > > Kenneth Marshall <k...@rice.edu> wrote: > > > > > > Alexander > > > > > > > I thought that UTF8, UTF-16 and UTF-32 can represent all the characters. > > > In that case, why wouldn't you use the UTF8 equivalent? At the least it > > > would save space. > > > > > * UTF-16 and UTF-32 are not widely used. > > * Wrongly coded UTF-8 can not be 100% saved (without loss) in UTF-16. > > True, but all correct characters map between them all. It would not be > unreasonable to discard incorrect UTF-8 characters. I do agree, that > losing the byte-level processing and avoiding all the endian nonsense > is preferable. Like you mentioned, UTF-16/32 can be converted to UTF-8 > for processing. > I am not saying that we MUST use UTF-8. Whatever we can use is okay for me. We should just not forgett that we are not only on Linux, BSD and some other systems. We run on Solaris, Mac, etc... And whatever we choose it should be choosen wisely. > Regards, > Ken > -- Kind Regards from Switzerland, Stevan Bajić ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ Dspam-devel mailing list Dspam-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspam-devel
