On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <[email protected]>wrote:
> The primary intent of the proposal was to extend ES Strings to support a
> uniform represent of all Unicode characters, including non-BMP. That means
> that any Unicode character should occupy exactly one element position
> within a String value. Interpreting \u{10ffff} as an UTF-16 encoding does
> not satisfy that objective. In particular, under that approach
> "\{10ffff}".length would be 2 while a uniform character representation
> should yield a length of 1.
>
> When this proposal was originally floated, the much of debated seemed to
> be about whether such a uniform character representation was desirable or
> even useful. See the thread starting at
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2011-May/014252.html also
> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2011-May/014316.html and
>
That seems highly likely to break existing code that assumes UTF16
representation of JS strings.
--
John A. Tamplin
Software Engineer (GWT), Google
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
