*CHAR: \u??????* requires six digits exactly:
IN: scratchpad CHAR: \u000032 .
50
no more:
IN: scratchpad CHAR: \u0000032 .
1: CHAR: \u0000032 .
^
Assertion failed
got "2"
expect ""
Type :help for debugging help.
no less:
IN: scratchpad CHAR: \u00032 .
1: CHAR: \u00032 .
^
Cannot create slice
from 0
to 6
seq T{ slice f 1 6 "u00032" }
reason "end > sequence"
Type :help for debugging help.
Is it too long and inconvenient?
*"\u??????"* dose almost the same, but with different consequence.
It is an error if there are less than six:
IN: scratchpad "\u00032" .
1: "\u00032" .
^
Cannot create slice
from 0
to 6
seq T{ slice f 2 7 "\\u00032" }
reason "end > sequence"
Type :help for debugging help.
But the remaining digits will be interpretered as normal character if
there are more than six:
IN: scratchpad "\u0000032" .
"\x032" ! the undocumented escape code
IN: scratchpad "\u00000032" .
"\032"
Does this requirement of six hexadecimal digits come from the Unicode Standard?
i.e. the range of codepoints defined by Unicode is [0,0x10FFFF], *currently*.
How do factor be extensible(in syntax) and follow the changes of
Unicode Standard in the future?
Does the meaning of "\u0000032" will be changed to:
* "2" (if the range changes to [0,0x???????])
* or an error (if the range changes to [0,0x????????])
?
Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Android is increasing in popularity, but the open development platform that
developers love is also attractive to malware creators. Download this white
paper to learn more about secure code signing practices that can help keep
Android apps secure.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=65839951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Factor-talk mailing list
Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
