Nor I. "Characters" are perhaps the most useless objects ever invented.
Now - a count of DEFAULT GRAPHEME CLUSTERs might be useful (for example, for display on a console which uses fixed-width fonts). Indeed, a whole class of DEFAULT GRAPHEME CLUSTER handling functions might come in very handy indeed. Bytes are useful. Default grapheme clusters are useful. But a "character"? What's the point?
But then, a default grapheme cluster might theoretically require up to 16 Unicode characters. (Maybe more, I don't know). Even bit-packed to 21 bits per character, that still gives us 336 bits. So I conclude that our string processing functions could go a lot faster if only we'd all use UTF-336. Er....?
Jill
> -----Original Message----- > From: Marco Cimarosti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 11:10 AM > To: 'Doug Ewell'; Unicode Mailing List > Cc: Theodore H. Smith > Subject: RE: Non-ascii string processing? > > > What strlen() cannot do is count�ng the number of > *characters* in a string. > But who cares? I can imagine very few situations where someone such an > information would be useful. > > _ Marco >
