Richard Wordingham wrote: > You're assuming that the source of the non-conformance is external to > the program. In the case that has caused me to ask about lone > surrogates, they were actually caused by a faulty character deletion > function within the program itself.
I've been bemused by all this discussion about how unpaired surrogates are supposed to behave, and this comment just cleared everything up for me. We're talking about a bug. Very well, then, the answer is that the bug should be fixed. -- Doug Ewell | http://ewellic.org | Thornton, CO 🇺🇸
