Stewart Stremler wrote:
begin quoting Andrew Lentvorski as of Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 03:53:58PM -0800:
And, for those who don't realize it, UTF-8 is backward compatible with
ASCII handling.
ANSI handling, I thought.
ASCII.
The range from 0-127 is precisely the same whether UTF-8 or ASCII.
Since UTF-8 ensures that NUL(0) is never part of an encoded sequence, it
generally survives ANSI processing, as well, but it is not backward
compatible with it. It is, in fact, the *only* encoding which has this
property.
This is why I harp on UTF-8. It generally continues to work even when
fed to an Ancient Crufty C Program(tm) since it doesn't break the C
string handling routines.
-a
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
