On 15 May 2017, at 23:16, Shawn Steele via Unicode <unicode@unicode.org> wrote: > > I’m not sure how the discussion of “which is better” relates to the > discussion of ill-formed UTF-8 at all.
It doesn’t, which is a point I made in my original reply to Henry. The only reason I answered his anti-UTF-16 rant at all was to point out that some of us don’t think UTF-16 is a mistake, and in fact can see various benefits (*particularly* as an in-memory representation). > And to the last, saying “you cannot process UTF-16 without handling > surrogates” seems to me to be the equivalent of saying “you cannot process > UTF-8 without handling lead & trail bytes”. That’s how the respective > encodings work. Quite. Kind regards, Alastair. -- http://alastairs-place.net