Re: Annoyances from Implementation of Canonical Equivalence (was: Pure Regular Expression Engines and Literal Clusters)

> Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 20:52:15 +0100 > From: Richard Wordingham via Unicode > > > > > I'm well aware of the official position. However, when we > > > > attempted to implement it unconditionally in Emacs, some people > > > > objected, and brought up good reasons. You can, of course, elect >

Re: Annoyances from Implementation of Canonical Equivalence (was: Pure Regular Expression Engines and Literal Clusters)

On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 09:43:23 +0300 Eli Zaretskii via Unicode wrote: > > Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 00:23:59 +0100 > > From: Richard Wordingham via Unicode > > > > > I'm well aware of the official position. However, when we > > > attempted to implement it unconditionally in Emacs, some people >

Re: Annoyances from Implementation of Canonical Equivalence (was: Pure Regular Expression Engines and Literal Clusters)

> Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 00:23:59 +0100 > From: Richard Wordingham via Unicode > > > I'm well aware of the official position. However, when we attempted > > to implement it unconditionally in Emacs, some people objected, and > > brought up good reasons. You can, of course, elect to disregard

Annoyances from Implementation of Canonical Equivalence (was: Pure Regular Expression Engines and Literal Clusters)

On Mon, 14 Oct 2019 21:41:19 +0300 Eli Zaretskii via Unicode wrote: > > Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 19:29:39 +0100 > > From: Richard Wordingham via Unicode > > The official position is that text that is canonically > > equivalent is the same. There are problem areas where traditional > > modes of