On Friday, May 2, 2014 2:15:41 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Thu, 01 May 2014 19:02:48 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote: > > - Worst of all what we > > *dont* see -- how many others dont see what we see?
> Again, this a deficiency of the font. There are very few code points in > Unicode which are intended to be invisible, e.g. space, newline, zero- > width joiner, control characters, etc., but they ought to be equally > invisible to everyone. No printable character should ever be invisible in > any decent font. Thats not what I meant. I wrote http://blog.languager.org/2014/04/unicoded-python.html – mostly on a debian box. Later on seeing it on a less heavily setup ubuntu box, I see ⟮ ⟯ ⟬ ⟭ ⦇ ⦈ ⦉ ⦊ have become 'missing-glyph' boxes. It leads me ask, how much else of what I am writing, some random reader has simply not seen? Quite simply we can never know – because most are going to go away saying "mojibaked/garbled rubbish" Speaking of what you understood of what I said: Yes invisible chars is another problem I was recently bitten by. I pasted something from google into emacs' org mode. Following that link again I kept getting a broken link. Until I found that the link had an invisible char The problem was that emacs was faithfully rendering that char according to standard, ie invisibly! -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
