On 10/05/2013 17:25, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 2:07 AM, rusi <rustompm...@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 10, 8:32 pm, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 1:24 AM, Ned Batchelder <n...@nedbatchelder.com> wrote:
On 5/10/2013 11:06 AM, jmfauth wrote:
On 8 mai, 15:19, Roy Smith <r...@panix.com> wrote:
Apropos to any of the myriad unicode threads that have been going on
recently:
http://xkcd.com/1209/
------
This reflects a lack of understanding of Unicode.
jmf
And this reflects a lack of a sense of humor. :)
Isn't that a crime in the UK?
ChrisA
The problem with English humour (as against standard humor) is that
its not unicode compliant
Unicode humour was carefully laid out to incorporate English humour.
In fact, if you use the standard variable-length-joke encoding, it's
possible for a Unicode joke to be decoded as if it were an English
joke, without any actual knowledge of Unicode. Unfortunately, this can
result in non-compliant English humour publishers producing jokes that
come out as gibberish in the rest of the world. Fortunately, we then
get to laugh at them.
ChrisA
This simply shows bias to the English speaking world, as does Python
unicode, at least in 3.3+. I wouldn't mind betting that other languages
can't cope, e.g. can 3.3+ manage the top secret joke that's so deadly
even the Germans die laughing?
--
If you're using GoogleCrap™ please read this
http://wiki.python.org/moin/GoogleGroupsPython.
Mark Lawrence
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
