--- Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jun 2004, Juerd wrote:
>
> > Dave Whipp skribis 2004-06-28 9:55 (-0700):
> > > > substr($string, 2 bytes, 4 bytes) = $substitute;
> > > substr($string, 2, 4 :bytes)
> >
> > substr($string, 2 but graphemes, 4 but bytes);
> >
> > I think "but" even makes sense, if substr defaults to something.
>
> I think mixing strings, bytes, graphemes, and code points together
> is a phenomenally bad idea, likely to lead to many tears, much
> gnashing of teeth, and quite a few rampages with sharp objects,
> not to mention a lot of code guaranteed to fail at the edge cases.
Hmm. Suppose that I have a system that is friendly to 80 byte records.
I want to output "meaningful" strings, so I want to partition a buffer
into 80-ish byte substrings, but preserve any graphemes (i.e., store
the data in a legible format).
How would I do that?
The obvious answer is a gnarly little loop, but I think I'd like to
have perl do that for me. Can I say something like:
while ($buffer)
{
$output = substr($buffer, 0, 80 but bytes, units => graphemes);
$buffer = substr($buffer, 0, length $output :graphemes);
$cout << $output << nl; # :-)
}
and get some dwimmery?
=Austin
>
> If, as a programmer, you *really* want to run with scissors then
> convert
> your string to a binary byte buffer and go from there. At least then
> when
> you poke out an eye you won't be nearly so surprised.
>
> Dan
>
> --------------------------------------"it's like
> this"-------------------
> Dan Sugalski even samurai
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
> teddy bears get drunk
>
>
