for displaying doublebyte-charset documents the east asian width semantics are indispensible. there are very good reasons to have two modes for the terminal — east asian (all but ascii and explicitly narrow kana/hangeul/etc. as two cells) and non-east-asian (all but kanji/hanzi/hanja, hangeul, and kana single-width). the first is cell-compatible with the DBCS terminals (useful for viewing forms, character-cell art, webpages, etc., including e.g. doublewidth cyrillic characters used as graphics) and the second with non-DBCS terminals (actual cyrillic text, for example.) iuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuv c
On 8/17/06, David Starner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/17/06, Rich Felker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is nothing but glibc being idiotic. Yes it's _allowed_ to do this > according to POSIX (POSIX makes no requirements about correspondence > of the values returned to any other standard) but it's obviously > incorrect for the width of À to be anything but 1, even if it was > historically displayed wide (wtf?!) on some legacy CJK terminal types. It's not obviously incorrect; in a CJK terminal, everything but ASCII was double-width, which actually a very convienant way of doing things. Many of these fonts are still around, and I suspect that many users still use terminals that expect everything but ASCII to be double-width. glibc here is merely supporting the way things work. -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
-- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
