+1 I don't think I understand the hesitation.
obie On 12/20/05, Joshua Harvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think Julik brought up a very important issue, and I wish it had > gotten more attention. Ruby's Unicode string handling is broken, > mostly because it doesn't count multibyte characters correctly. > > Thijs Van Der Vossen wrote: > >If you _need_ a dynamic language with a true and tested Unicode > >String type _right now_ you might want to take a look at Python. ;-) > > Well, Julik did have a look at Python: "The Python and Perl > ways of doing it are to distinguish between a 'bytestring' and a > 'unicode string.' This is a way of the apocalypse." > > More importantly, though, why should we defer to other languages and > frameworks? We love Rails, we love Ruby, and by making a small change > in the String class we'll have best-in-class Unicode support. > > Add Globalize into the mix and you open up huge possibilities. Typo > with out-of-the-box support for dozens of languages, including > localized date display. Instiki with built in multi-language support, > so that the rails wiki could be easily translated into dozens of > languages. Ecommerce sites that are actually useful outside the US and > UK. > > Because of the power and flexibility of Ruby and Rails, we can add > this elusive i18n stuff pretty easily. Why not do it? It's a > make-or-break feature for millions of people. > > _______________________________________________ > Rails-core mailing list > Rails-core@lists.rubyonrails.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-core > > > _______________________________________________ Rails-core mailing list Rails-core@lists.rubyonrails.org http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-core
