On 9/9/2011 12:12 PM, fwierzbi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 10:39 PM, Terry Reedy<tjre...@udel.edu> wrote:
On 9/8/2011 6:15 PM, fwierzbi...@gmail.com wrote:
Oops, forgot to add the link for the gory details for Java and> 2 byte
unicode:
http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/Intl/Supplementary/
This is dated 2004. Basically, they considered several options, tried out 4,
and ended up sticking with char[] (sequences) as UTF-16 with char = 16 bit
code unit and added 32-bit Character(int) class for low-level manipulation
of code points.
I did not see the indexing problem mentioned. I get the impression that they
encourage sequence forward-backward iteration (cursor-based access) rather
than random-access indexing.
Hmmm, sorry for the irrelevant link - my lack of expertise here is
showing. What I do know is that we (meaning Jim Baker) are taking
great pains to always use codepoints even for random access in our
unicode code. I can't speak to the performance implications without
some deeper study into what Jim has done.
I am curious how you index by code point rather than code unit with
16-bit code units and how it compares with the method I posted. Is there
anything I can read? Reply off list if you want.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
