Sherman wrote:
> The CR# so far I have are
> 7014645: Support Perl style Unicode hex notation \x{...}
> 7014633: Support loose matching forboth abbreviated and longer names of
> Unicode priperty
> 7014640: Add meta character for line ending '\R'
> It might take a couple days(?) for these CR# to
On 1.27.2011 3:09, Tom Christiansen wrote:
7006289: java.util.regex yields nonsense by breaking the connection between \b
and \w
Categoryjava:classes_util
State 1-Dispatched, bug
Priority: 4-Low
Submit Date 12-DEC-2010
7006291: Java claims to support Unicode p
Mark wrote:
> The Unicode Standard distinguishes between Unicode Strings (16-bit) and
> UTF-16. In the former, which is often the form used in programming
> languages, a singleton value of 0xD800..0xDFFF is allowed, and is treated
> as if it were a reserved code point.
Ahah! "Unicode Strings (16
> I guess you are asking for something like?
I'm not asking for that. What I'm saying is that as far as I can tell, there
is no way in Java to meet the terms of RL1.1, because there is not a way to
use hex numbers in any syntax for values above to indicate literals.
That is, if you supply "ab
On Monday, 24 January 2011 at 14:39:59 +0900,
Masayoshi Okutsu wrote
>>> Are you talking about unpaired surrogates or something else?
>> Yes, I am talking about unpaired surrogates.
> I believe each code unit of UTF-16 gets converted to its code point. So,
> an unpaired surrogate gets conver
Under the RL2.2 link of tr18, there appears to be a error:
C2. An implementation claiming conformance to Level 2 of this
specification shall satisfy C1, and meet the requirements
described in the following sections:
RL2.1 Canonical Equivalents
RL2.2 Extended G
Mark wrote:
> We are coming up to a quarterly Unicode Technical Committee meeting
> (starting Feb 7), so there is the opportunity to make requests / proposals
> about UTS18. In particular, if there are areas of the spec that are unclear
> or features that people would like to see added or changed,
On 01/26/2011 11:50 AM, Mark Davis ☕ wrote:
> I guess you are asking for something like?
I'm not asking for that. What I'm saying is that as far as I can tell,
there is no way in Java to meet the terms of RL1.1, because there is
not a way to use hex numbers in any syntax for values above
Ok, now I understand. With that change, the situation is much better. It
doesn't fully satisfy RL1.1, because you can't use hex codepoint numbers --
you have to use the fairly ugly workaround of
String hexPattern = codePoint <= 0x
? String.format("\\u%04x", codePoint)
: String.format("
