On 12/13/2013 11:27 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 3:15 AM, <wxjmfa...@gmail.com> wrote:
One should recognize, with win7, MS, finally, produce
a full unicode system. Strangely, among all the "bashing"
one can read about that system, this is rarely mentioned.
(With an excellent unicode coding scheme!)
[citation needed]
Chris, I hardly think Jim's last statement (which I presume is your
target) is egregious enough to start another junk subthread of 9 (now
10) posts. Certainly '[citation needed]' is a pretty senseless comment.
'Citation' to what, for what? It is well-known that Windows uses 2-byte
words for unicode coding. If you want a citation for that fact, find it
yourself.
What is not clear to me is whether Windows internally uses UCS-2, which
only codes BMP chars, and which would *not* be excellent, or UTF-16,
which covers all chars by using surrogates. I will guess the latter.
More to the point, even if MS uses a complete coding scheme internally
(UFT-16), it does not, as far as I know, make it fully available and
usable to *me*, as I showed in my response about code page 65001.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
