On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 07:18:00PM +0000, Alastair Houghton wrote: > On 13 Mar 2017, at 17:55, J Decker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I liked the Go implementation of character type - a rune type - which is a > > codepoint. and strings that return runes from by index. > > https://blog.golang.org/strings > > IMO, returning code points by index is a mistake. It over-emphasises > the importance of the code point, which helps to continue the notion > in some developers’ minds that code points are somehow “characters”. > It also leads to people unnecessarily using UCS-4 as an internal > representation, which seems to have very few advantages in practice > over UTF-16.
But there are many text operations that require access to Unicode code points. Take for example text layout, as mapping characters to glyphs and back has to operate on code points. The idea that you never need to work with code points is too simplistic. Regards, Khaled
