On Jun 9, 2018, at 12:18 PM, Xueming Shen wrote:
>
> Ideally I would assume we would want to have a utf-8 internal storage for
> String, even in theory utf8 is supposed to be used externally and utf16
> to be the internal one.
Separately from my point about ByteSequence, I agree that "doubling
I'm glad to see you are thinking about this, Florian.
You appear to be aiming at a way to compactly store and manipulate
series of octets (in an arbitrary encoding) with an emphasis on using
those octets to represent strings, in the usual sense of character sequences.
Would you agree that this
On 6/9/18, 3:27 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
Lately I've been thinking about string representation. The world
turned out not to be UCS-2 or UTF-16, after all, and we often have to
deal with strings generally encoded as ASCII or UTF-8, but we aren't
always encoded this way (and there might not even
Skipping the shebang tests is fine a workaround Mandy; thanks,
-Joe
On 6/8/2018 9:57 PM, mandy chung wrote:
I run into some issue with shebang tests. Since Jon is on vacation,
I revise the patch to skip the shebang test temporarily until he returns.
Mandy
diff --git
I revised the webrev to have warning only executable name for unpack200 instead
of full path on Windows, which I believe is what was intended all along, the
test is also revised to take unpack200.exe on the Windows platform.
The updated version is at
Lately I've been thinking about string representation. The world
turned out not to be UCS-2 or UTF-16, after all, and we often have to
deal with strings generally encoded as ASCII or UTF-8, but we aren't
always encoded this way (and there might not even be a charset
declaration, see the ELF
