On Wednesday 22 August 2012 15:07:50 Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote: > Martin Schreiber schrieb: > > On Wednesday 22 August 2012 02:01:09 Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote: > >> You still miss the point. Why deal with single characters, by index, > >> when working with substrings also covers the single-character use? > > > > Why not if it is faster, simpler and more intuitive for beginners? > > Because they will find out soon, that such an simplified approach is > inappropriate in working with Unicode. English people had a hard time to > accept the existence of larger character sets (than ASCII), and > considered it "other people's problem". But when talking Unicode it's > *your* problem if your procedures fail on foreign languages or > codepages. Ignoring ligatures or other foreign languages' constructs and > habits will bite you, sonner or later. > I am not talking about Unicode. I am talking about day by day programming of an average programmer where the live is easier with utf-16 than with utf-8. Unicode is not done by using pos() instead of character indexes. I think everybody knows my opinion, I stop now.
Thanks, Martin _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel