2010/3/29 Henrik Johansen <[email protected]>: > > On Mar 29, 2010, at 11:16 30AM, Nicolas Cellier wrote: > >> I presume that under the idiom "latin1" you refer to code page 1252 >> rather than iso8859-L1, right ? >> >> Nicolas > Good question :) > What IS the presumed internal encoding of Bytestrings in Squeak? > That's the one I meant, I merely assumed it was latin1 seeing as how the text > converter refers to it as such. > Personally I thought it was iso8859-L1, seeing as the bytestring to unicode > conversion does a simple shift of chars > 127 to the 0080 - 00FF range. > > Cheers, > Henry >
>From what I understood, CP1252 is Microsoft "latin1" and use codes 128 to 159. ISO8859-L1 match fisrt 256 codes of unicode latin-1 and has codes 128 to 159 unused. You know, when Microsoft "uses" a standard, it's always a better standard ;) I have nothing against CP1252, it's an optimization which avoid wasting 32 cheap codes. But I'm not sure about various compatibility issues in/with the external world... Squeak clearly uses CP1252. For Pharo, there might be a mix of the two since Sophie-like refactorings. Surely what John was refering to. Nicolas > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
