Re: gcc and utf-8 source

["Antoine Leca" <Antoine-Freetype@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tuesday, November 16th, 2004 12:44Z srintuar va escriure:
>
> Unlike the famous gates quote, it is reasonable to state that certain
> things represent ending points. For example, a 64 bit time counter for
> seconds will probably be enough.

Perhaps what is not reasonable here is to stop a 1-second precision...


> Language itself will change over time, though not as fast as it has in
> the past.

How does language relates to the subject?
Or are you speaking about orthography instead?

> A world with 20years of solid support for unicode/utf-8 would be
> free to work on more interesting problems.

Giving the actual market for user-directed operating systems and
consequently encoding of inputted datas, I am not really sure utf-8 would be
the only content-encoding choice available in the very near future, or even
10-20 years from now.

Of course, I can be wrong on this one.
In fact, I hope I am wrong ;-).
We all hope that. But we do not hold our breathes, do you?


> Changes to unicode dont require any change to UTF-8 itself.

The discussion came up about your claim that it would be better to restrict
the encoding of strings inside programs to the only use of UTF-8 encoded
strings. Any change to Unicode (in the script involved; say, if in German,
Umlaut becomes a different codepoint from present diaeresis U+0308...) would
affect such strings: it would be the actual characters rather than the bytes
encoded, but nevertheless the program would have to be massaged; which was
precisely the point.

Tschüß,

Antoine


--
Linux-UTF8:   i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive:      http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/