On Sun, Dec 8, 2019 at 8:33 AM Bob van der Poel wrote:
> Yeah, heard all that before :) But, seriously, I wonder how many short
> (less than 100 lines) programs there are out there written in py2 that will
> not run in py3. Good thing py2 will still be available to be installed for
> many, many ye
On Sat, Dec 7, 2019 at 12:47 PM DL Neil via Python-list <
python-list@python.org> wrote:
> On 8/12/19 5:50 AM, Bob van der Poel wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 7, 2019 at 4:00 AM Barry Scott
> wrote:
> >>> On 6 Dec 2019, at 18:17, Bob van der Poel wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I have some files which came off the n
On 8/12/19 5:50 AM, Bob van der Poel wrote:
On Sat, Dec 7, 2019 at 4:00 AM Barry Scott wrote:
On 6 Dec 2019, at 18:17, Bob van der Poel wrote:
I have some files which came off the net with, I'm assuming, unicode
characters in the names. I have a very short program which takes the
filename and
On Sat, Dec 7, 2019 at 4:00 AM Barry Scott wrote:
>
>
> > On 6 Dec 2019, at 18:17, Bob van der Poel wrote:
> >
> > I have some files which came off the net with, I'm assuming, unicode
> > characters in the names. I have a very short program which takes the
> > filename and puts into an emacs buf
> On 6 Dec 2019, at 18:17, Bob van der Poel wrote:
>
> I have some files which came off the net with, I'm assuming, unicode
> characters in the names. I have a very short program which takes the
> filename and puts into an emacs buffer, and then lets me add information to
> that new file (it's
Bob van der Poel wrote:
> I have some files which came off the net with, I'm assuming, unicode
> characters in the names. I have a very short program which takes the
> filename and puts into an emacs buffer, and then lets me add information
> to that new file (it's a poor man's DB).
>
> Next, I c
On 12/6/2019 1:17 PM, Bob van der Poel wrote:
I have some files which came off the net with, I'm assuming, unicode
characters in the names. I have a very short program which takes the
filename and puts into an emacs buffer, and then lets me add information to
that new file (it's a poor man's DB).
On 7/12/19 7:17 AM, Bob van der Poel wrote:
I have some files which came off the net with, I'm assuming, unicode
characters in the names. I have a very short program which takes the
filename and puts into an emacs buffer, and then lets me add information to
that new file (it's a poor man's DB).
On 2019-09-19 09:55, Gregory Ewing wrote:
Eli the Bearded wrote:
There isn't anything called UCS1.
Apparently there is, but it's not a character set, it's a loudspeaker.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1205978-REG/yorkville_sound_ucs1_1200w_15_horn_loaded.html
The OP might mean Py_UCS
Eli the Bearded wrote:
There isn't anything called UCS1.
Apparently there is, but it's not a character set, it's a loudspeaker.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1205978-REG/yorkville_sound_ucs1_1200w_15_horn_loaded.html
--
Greg
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 6:51 AM Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
>
> In comp.lang.python, moi wrote:
> > I hope, one day, for those who are interested in Unicode,
> > they find a book, publication, ... which will explain
> > what is UCS1.
>
> There isn't anything called UCS1. There
In comp.lang.python, moi wrote:
> I hope, one day, for those who are interested in Unicode,
> they find a book, publication, ... which will explain
> what is UCS1.
There isn't anything called UCS1. There is a UTF-1, but don't use it.
UTF-8 is better in every way.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U
On 20-4-2019 12:47, Luuk wrote:
On 20-4-2019 11:26, wxjmfa...@gmail.com wrote:
http://unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/Archives-Old/UML018/0594.html
[quoot]
> It is simple to make a compacter version of UTF-8 using the base
> 256 character codes were possible (comacter for many languages).
On 20-4-2019 11:26, wxjmfa...@gmail.com wrote:
http://unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/Archives-Old/UML018/0594.html
[quoot]
> It is simple to make a compacter version of UTF-8 using the base
> 256 character codes were possible (comacter for many languages).
No. If you think otherwise, you ha
On 2018-07-17 08:37, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Tim Chase :
> > Wait, but now you're talking about vendors. Much of the crux of
> > this discussion has been about personal scripts that don't need to
> > marshal Unicode strings in and out of various functions/objects.
>
> In both personal and profes
Tim Chase :
> On 2018-07-16 23:59, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> Tim Chase :
>> > While the python world has moved its efforts into improving
>> > Python3, Python2 hasn't suddenly stopped working.
>>
>> The sword of Damocles is hanging on its head. Unless a consortium is
>> erected to support Python
On 2018-07-16 23:59, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Tim Chase :
> > While the python world has moved its efforts into improving
> > Python3, Python2 hasn't suddenly stopped working.
>
> The sword of Damocles is hanging on its head. Unless a consortium is
> erected to support Python2, no vendor will be
On 16/07/18 21:16, Rhodri James wrote:
On 16/07/18 20:58, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 7/16/2018 1:27 PM, Jim Lee wrote:
90% of the world *is* "beneath my notice" when it comes to
programming for myself. I really don't care if that's not PC enough
for you.
Had you actually read my words with *in
On 2018-07-16 21:59, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
Tim Chase :
While the python world has moved its efforts into improving Python3,
Python2 hasn't suddenly stopped working.
The sword of Damocles is hanging on its head. Unless a consortium is
erected to support Python2, no vendor will be able to use it
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 6:32 AM, Tim Chase
wrote:
> On 2018-07-16 18:31, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> You say that all you want is a switch to turn off Unicode (and
>> replace it with what? Kanji strings? Cyrillic? Shift_JS? no of
>> course not, I'm being absurd -- replace it with ASCII, what else
>>
Tim Chase :
> While the python world has moved its efforts into improving Python3,
> Python2 hasn't suddenly stopped working.
The sword of Damocles is hanging on its head. Unless a consortium is
erected to support Python2, no vendor will be able to use it in the
medium term.
Given the recent even
On 2018-07-16 18:31, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> You say that all you want is a switch to turn off Unicode (and
> replace it with what? Kanji strings? Cyrillic? Shift_JS? no of
> course not, I'm being absurd -- replace it with ASCII, what else
> could any right-thinking person want, right?).
But we a
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 6:16 AM, Rhodri James wrote:
> On 16/07/18 20:58, Terry Reedy wrote:
>>
>> On 7/16/2018 1:27 PM, Jim Lee wrote:
>>
>>> 90% of the world *is* "beneath my notice" when it comes to programming
>>> for myself. I really don't care if that's not PC enough for you.
>>>
>>> Had y
On 16/07/18 20:58, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 7/16/2018 1:27 PM, Jim Lee wrote:
90% of the world *is* "beneath my notice" when it comes to programming
for myself. I really don't care if that's not PC enough for you.
Had you actually read my words with *intent* rather than *reaction*,
you would
På Mon, 16 Jul 2018 11:33:46 -0700
Jim Lee skrev:
> Go right ahead. I find it surprising that Stephen isn't banned,
> considering the fact that he ridicules anyone he doesn't agree with.
> But I guess he's one of the 'good 'ol boys', and so exempt from the code
> of conduct.
Well said!
--
On 7/16/2018 1:27 PM, Jim Lee wrote:
90% of the world *is* "beneath my notice" when it comes to programming
for myself. I really don't care if that's not PC enough for you.
Had you actually read my words with *intent* rather than *reaction*, you
would notice that I suggested the *option* of
On 7/16/2018 1:13 PM, Jim Lee wrote:
I just think that a language should allow one to bypass Unicode handling
easily *when it's not needed*.
Both for patching IDLE and for my currently private work, I usually only
use Ascii, and no unicode escapes. When I do, it does not matter
whether edit
On 16/07/18 18:38, Rhodri James wrote:
Actually having an option of turning off Unicode *does* make it harder
to use, because you end up coming across programs that have Unicode and
surprise you when they misbehave. And yes I saw that 90% of your
programs aren't intended to get out into the wo
On 07/16/18 11:31, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 10:27:18 -0700, Jim Lee wrote:
Had you actually read my words with *intent* rather than *reaction*, you
would notice that I suggested the *option* of turning off Unicode.
Yes, I know what you wrote, and I read it with intent.
Ji
On 07/16/18 10:40, Mark Lawrence wrote:
On 16/07/18 18:27, Jim Lee wrote:
Obviously, the most vocal representatives of the Python community are
too sensitive about their language to enable rational discussion.
Please moderators ban this person as he's going down the same line as
bartc and s
On 16/07/18 19:31, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
I'm simply not seeing the advantage of:
from __future__ import no_unicode
print("Hello World!") # stand in for any string handling on ASCII
Sure this should be "from __past__ import no_unicode"?
gd&r
--
Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd
--
http
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 10:27:18 -0700, Jim Lee wrote:
> Had you actually read my words with *intent* rather than *reaction*, you
> would notice that I suggested the *option* of turning off Unicode.
Yes, I know what you wrote, and I read it with intent.
Jim, you seem to be labouring under the misapp
On 16/07/18 18:27, Jim Lee wrote:
90% of the world *is* "beneath my notice" when it comes to programming
for myself. I really don't care if that's not PC enough for you.
Had you actually read my words with *intent* rather than *reaction*, you
would notice that I suggested the *option* of tur
On 16/07/18 18:13, Jim Lee wrote:
I just think that a language should allow one to bypass Unicode handling
easily *when it's not needed*.
I have no idea what this is meant to mean. I've written loads of code
for my own purposes and I've never had to think about Unicode, so why
should an
On 16/07/18 18:27, Jim Lee wrote:
Obviously, the most vocal representatives of the Python community are
too sensitive about their language to enable rational discussion.
Please moderators ban this person as he's going down the same line as
bartc and similar, it is completely unacceptable, he's
On 07/16/18 03:39, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Good for you.
But Python is not a programming language written to satisfy the needs of
people like you, and ONLY people like you.
It is a language written to satisfy the needs of people from Uzbekistan,
and China, and Japan, and India, and Brazil, and
On 07/16/18 03:26, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
But the thing is, that complexity is *inherent in the domain*. You can
try to deal with it without Unicode, and as soon as you have users
expecting to use more than one code page, you're doomed.
No, I'm not doomed, because there *are* no other users
On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 02:22:59 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 2:05 AM, Mark Lawrence
> wrote:
>> Out of curiosity where does my mum's Welsh come into the equation as I
>> believe that it is not recognised by the EU as a language?
>>
>>
> What characters does it use? Mostly L
On 16/07/18 17:22, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 2:05 AM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
On 16/07/18 15:17, Dan Sommers wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 10:39:49 +, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
... people who think that if ISO-8859-7 was good enough for Jesus ...
It may have been good enou
On 16/07/18 17:26, Larry Martell wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
On 16/07/18 15:17, Dan Sommers wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 10:39:49 +, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
... people who think that if ISO-8859-7 was good enough for Jesus ...
It may have been good enou
On 16/07/18 17:05, Mark Lawrence wrote:
On 16/07/18 15:17, Dan Sommers wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 10:39:49 +, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
... people who think that if ISO-8859-7 was good enough for Jesus ...
It may have been good enough for his disciples, but Jesus spoke Aramaic.
Also, ISO-8
On 16/07/18 17:22, Chris Angelico wrote:
What characters does it use? Mostly Latin letters?
Basic Latin plus U+0174 (LATIN CAPITAL LETTER W WITH CIRCUMFLEX) through
to U+0177 (LATIN SMALL LETTER Y WITH CIRCUMFLEX) I think.
--
Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/li
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 16/07/18 15:17, Dan Sommers wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 10:39:49 +, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>
>>> ... people who think that if ISO-8859-7 was good enough for Jesus ...
>>
>>
>> It may have been good enough for his disciples, but
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 2:05 AM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 16/07/18 15:17, Dan Sommers wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 10:39:49 +, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>
>>> ... people who think that if ISO-8859-7 was good enough for Jesus ...
>>
>>
>> It may have been good enough for his disciples, but J
On 16/07/18 15:17, Dan Sommers wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 10:39:49 +, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
... people who think that if ISO-8859-7 was good enough for Jesus ...
It may have been good enough for his disciples, but Jesus spoke Aramaic.
Also, ISO-8859-7 doesn't cover ancient polytonic Gre
> The buzzing noise you just heard was the joke whizzing past your head
> *wink*
I have twins aged four. They also like to yell "I cheated!", whenever they
are called out.
In general, you need to get rid of tat teenage brat persona you practice.
The "ranting rick" charade was especially toe-
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 14:17:35 +, Dan Sommers wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 10:39:49 +, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
>> ... people who think that if ISO-8859-7 was good enough for Jesus ...
>
> It may have been good enough for his disciples, but Jesus spoke Aramaic.
The buzzing noise you just
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 10:39:49 +, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> ... people who think that if ISO-8859-7 was good enough for Jesus ...
It may have been good enough for his disciples, but Jesus spoke Aramaic.
Also, ISO-8859-7 doesn't cover ancient polytonic Greek; it only covers
modern monotonic Gree
On Tue, Jan 2, 2018, at 10:36, Robin Becker wrote:
> >> u'\u200e28\u200e/\u200e09\u200e/\u200e1962'
>
> I guess I'm really wondering whether the BIDI control characters have any
> semantic meaning. Most numbers seem to be LTR.
>
> If I saw u'\u200f12' it seems to imply that the characters should
On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 2:36 AM, Robin Becker wrote:
> On 02/01/2018 15:18, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 1:30 AM, Robin Becker wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm seeing some strange characters in web responses eg
>>>
>>> u'\u200e28\u200e/\u200e09\u200e/\u200e1962'
>>>
>>> for a date of birth
On 02/01/2018 15:18, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 1:30 AM, Robin Becker wrote:
I'm seeing some strange characters in web responses eg
u'\u200e28\u200e/\u200e09\u200e/\u200e1962'
for a date of birth. The code \u200e is LEFT-TO-RIGHT MARK according to
unicodedata.name. I tried
On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 1:30 AM, Robin Becker wrote:
> I'm seeing some strange characters in web responses eg
>
> u'\u200e28\u200e/\u200e09\u200e/\u200e1962'
>
> for a date of birth. The code \u200e is LEFT-TO-RIGHT MARK according to
> unicodedata.name. I tried unicodedata.normalize, but it leaves
Matt wrote:
Hi Leam-
>
> Targeting Python 2.6 for deployment on RHEL/CentOS 6 is a perfectly
> valid use case, and after the recent discussions in multiple threads
> (your "Design: method in class or general function?" and INADA Naoki's
> "People choosing Python 3"), I doubt it would be very usefu
On 2017-09-17 17:27, leam hall wrote:
>
> Ah! So this works in Py2:
>def __str__(self):
> name= self.name.encode("utf-8")
>
>
> It completely fails in Py3:
> PVT b'Lakeisha F\xc3\xa1bi\xc3\xa1n' 7966A4 [F] Age: 22
>
>
> Note that moving __str__() to display() gets the same result
On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> wrote:
> leam hall wrote:
>
> > Doesn't seem to work. The failing code takes the strings as is from the
> > database. it will occasionally fail when a name comes up that uses
> > a non-ascii character.
>
> Your problem in nuce: the Py
leam hall wrote:
> Doesn't seem to work. The failing code takes the strings as is from the
> database. it will occasionally fail when a name comes up that uses
> a non-ascii character.
Your problem in nuce: the Python 2 __str__() method must not return unicode.
>>> class Character:
... def _
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 2:20 AM, leam hall wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 9:13 AM, Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> wrote:
>
>> Leam Hall wrote:
>>
>> > On 09/17/2017 08:30 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> >> On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 9:38 PM, Leam Hall wrote:
>> >>> Still trying to keep this Py2 and P
On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 9:13 AM, Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> wrote:
> Leam Hall wrote:
>
> > On 09/17/2017 08:30 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> >> On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 9:38 PM, Leam Hall wrote:
> >>> Still trying to keep this Py2 and Py3 compatible.
> >>>
> >>> The Py2 error is:
> >>>
Leam Hall wrote:
> On 09/17/2017 08:30 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 9:38 PM, Leam Hall wrote:
>>> Still trying to keep this Py2 and Py3 compatible.
>>>
>>> The Py2 error is:
>>> UnicodeEncodeError: 'ascii' codec can't encode character
>>> u'\xf6' in posit
On 09/17/2017 08:30 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 9:38 PM, Leam Hall wrote:
Still trying to keep this Py2 and Py3 compatible.
The Py2 error is:
UnicodeEncodeError: 'ascii' codec can't encode character u'\xf6'
in position 8: ordinal not in range(128)
even
On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 9:38 PM, Leam Hall wrote:
> Still trying to keep this Py2 and Py3 compatible.
>
> The Py2 error is:
> UnicodeEncodeError: 'ascii' codec can't encode character u'\xf6'
> in position 8: ordinal not in range(128)
>
> even when the string is manually converted:
On 17 September 2017 at 12:38, Leam Hall wrote:
> On 09/17/2017 07:25 AM, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 17 Sep 2017 08:03 pm, Leam Hall wrote:
>>
>>> I'm still trying to figure out how to convert a string to unicode in
>>> Python 2.
>>
>>
>>
>> A Python 2 string is a string of bytes, so you
On Tue, 07 Mar 2017 14:05:15 -0800, John Nagle wrote:
> How do I test if a Python 2.7.8 build was built for 32-bit Unicode?
sys.maxunicode will be 1114111 if it is a "wide" (32-bit) build and 65535
if it is a "narrow" (16-bit) build.
You can double-check with:
unichr(0x10) # will raise V
On 3/7/2017 5:05 PM, John Nagle wrote:
How do I test if a Python 2.7.8 build was built for 32-bit
Unicode? (I'm dealing with shared hosting, and I'm stuck
with their provided versions.)
If I give this to Python 2.7.x:
sy = u'\U0001f60f'
len(sy) is 1 on a Ubuntu 14.04LTS machine, but 2
On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 9:05 AM, John Nagle wrote:
>How do I test if a Python 2.7.8 build was built for 32-bit
> Unicode? (I'm dealing with shared hosting, and I'm stuck
> with their provided versions.)
>
> If I give this to Python 2.7.x:
>
> sy = u'\U0001f60f'
>
> len(sy) is 1 on a Ubuntu
On 2016-12-16 02:44, MRAB wrote:
On 2016-12-15 21:57, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 12/15/2016 1:06 PM, MRAB wrote:
On 2016-12-15 16:53, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
Suppose I have a Unicode character, and I want to determine the script or
scripts it belongs to.
For example:
U+0033 DIGIT THREE "3" belongs
On 2016-12-15 21:57, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 12/15/2016 1:06 PM, MRAB wrote:
On 2016-12-15 16:53, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
Suppose I have a Unicode character, and I want to determine the script or
scripts it belongs to.
For example:
U+0033 DIGIT THREE "3" belongs to the script "COMMON";
U+0061 LAT
On 12/15/2016 1:06 PM, MRAB wrote:
On 2016-12-15 16:53, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
Suppose I have a Unicode character, and I want to determine the script or
scripts it belongs to.
For example:
U+0033 DIGIT THREE "3" belongs to the script "COMMON";
U+0061 LATIN SMALL LETTER A "a" belongs to the scri
On 12/15/2016 11:53 AM, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
Suppose I have a Unicode character, and I want to determine the script or
scripts it belongs to.
For example:
U+0033 DIGIT THREE "3" belongs to the script "COMMON";
U+0061 LATIN SMALL LETTER A "a" belongs to the script "LATIN";
U+03BE GREEK SMALL LE
On 2016-12-15 16:53, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
Suppose I have a Unicode character, and I want to determine the script or
scripts it belongs to.
For example:
U+0033 DIGIT THREE "3" belongs to the script "COMMON";
U+0061 LATIN SMALL LETTER A "a" belongs to the script "LATIN";
U+03BE GREEK SMALL LETTE
I think this might be what you want:
https://docs.python.org/3/howto/unicode.html#unicode-properties
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Steve D'Aprano
wrote:
> Suppose I have a Unicode character, and I want to determine the script or
> scripts it belongs to.
>
> For example:
>
> U+0033 DIGIT THREE
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Steve D'Aprano
wrote:
> Suppose I have a Unicode character, and I want to determine the script or
> scripts it belongs to.
>
> For example:
>
> U+0033 DIGIT THREE "3" belongs to the script "COMMON";
> U+0061 LATIN SMALL LETTER A "a" belongs to the script "LATIN";
>
Steven D'Aprano :
But when you get down to fundamentals, character sets and alphabets have
always blurred the line between presentation and meaning. W ("double-u")
was, once upon a time, UU
And before that, it was VV, because the Romans used V the
way we now use U, and didn't have a letter U.
Ben Bacarisse wrote:
The problem with that theory is that 'er/re' (this is e and r in either
order) is the 3rd most common pair in English but have been placed
together.
No, they haven't. The order of the characters in the type
basket goes down the slanted columns of keys, so E and R
are separa
On Sat, Apr 9, 2016, at 12:25 PM, Mark Lawrence via Python-list wrote:
> Again, where is the relevance to Python in this discussion, as we're on
> the main Python mailing list? Please can the moderators take this stuff
> out, it is getting beyond the pale.
You need to come to grip with the fact
On 09/04/2016 17:08, Rustom Mody wrote:
On Saturday, April 9, 2016 at 7:14:05 PM UTC+5:30, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
The problem with that theory is that 'er/re' (this is e and r in either
order) is the 3rd most common pair in English but have been placed
together. ou and et (in either order) are th
Rustom Mody writes:
> On Saturday, April 9, 2016 at 7:14:05 PM UTC+5:30, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> The problem with that theory is that 'er/re' (this is e and r in either
>> order) is the 3rd most common pair in English but have been placed
>> together. ou and et (in either order) are the 15th and
On Saturday, April 9, 2016 at 7:14:05 PM UTC+5:30, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> The problem with that theory is that 'er/re' (this is e and r in either
> order) is the 3rd most common pair in English but have been placed
> together. ou and et (in either order) are the 15th and 22nd most common
> and the
Ben Bacarisse writes:
> alister writes:
>
>>
>> the design of qwerty was not to "Slow" the typist bu to ensure that the
>> hammers for letters commonly used together are spaced widely apart,
>> reducing the portion of trier travel arc were the could jam.
>> I and E are actually such a pair w
alister writes:
>
> the design of qwerty was not to "Slow" the typist bu to ensure that the
> hammers for letters commonly used together are spaced widely apart,
> reducing the portion of trier travel arc were the could jam.
> I and E are actually such a pair which is why they are at opposite
On Fri, 08 Apr 2016 20:20:02 -0400, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 11:04:53 -0700 (PDT), Rustom Mody
> declaimed the following:
>
>>Its reasonably likely that all our keyboards start QWERT...
>> Doesn't make it a sane design.
>>
> It was a sane design -- for early mechanical
Steven D'Aprano :
> But when you get down to fundamentals, character sets and alphabets have
> always blurred the line between presentation and meaning. W ("double-u")
> was, once upon a time, UU
But as every Finnish-speaker now knows, "w" is only an old-fashioned
typographic variant of the glyph
On Sat, 9 Apr 2016 03:21 am, Peter Pearson wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Apr 2016 16:00:10 +1000, Steven D'Aprano
> wrote:
>> On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 02:51 am, Peter Pearson wrote:
>>>
>>> The Unicode consortium was certifiably insane when it went into the
>>> typesetting business.
>>
>> They are not, and neve
Adding link
On Friday, April 8, 2016 at 11:48:07 PM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote:
> 5.12 Deprecation
>
> In the Unicode Standard, the term deprecation is used somewhat differently
> than it is in some other standards. Deprecation is used to mean that a
> character or other feature is strongly d
On Friday, April 8, 2016 at 11:33:38 PM UTC+5:30, Peter Pearson wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Apr 2016 03:50:16 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 3:44 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> [snip]
> >> (As for ligatures, I understand that there might be quite a bit of
> >> legacy software that ded
On Friday, April 8, 2016 at 11:14:21 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Peter Pearson :
>
> > On Fri, 08 Apr 2016 16:00:10 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >> They are not, and never have been, in the typesetting business.
> >> Perhaps characters are not the only things easily confused *wink*
>
On Sat, 9 Apr 2016 03:50:16 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 3:44 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
[snip]
>> (As for ligatures, I understand that there might be quite a bit of
>> legacy software that dedicated code points and code pages for ligatures.
>> Translating that legacy soft
On Friday, April 8, 2016 at 10:24:17 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > No I am not clever/criminal enough to know how to write a text that is
> > visually
> > close to
> > print "Hello World"
> > but is internally closer to
> > rm -rf /
>
On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 3:44 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Unicode heroically and definitively solved the problems ASCII had posed
> but introduced a bag of new, trickier problems.
>
> (As for ligatures, I understand that there might be quite a bit of
> legacy software that dedicated code points and
Peter Pearson :
> On Fri, 08 Apr 2016 16:00:10 +1000, Steven D'Aprano
> wrote:
>> They are not, and never have been, in the typesetting business.
>> Perhaps characters are not the only things easily confused *wink*
>
> Defining codepoints that deal with appearance but not with meaning is
> going
On Fri, 08 Apr 2016 16:00:10 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 02:51 am, Peter Pearson wrote:
>>
>> The Unicode consortium was certifiably insane when it went into the
>> typesetting business.
>
> They are not, and never have been, in the typesetting business. Perhaps
> character
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Or for that matter:
>
> a = akjhvciwfdwkejfc2qweoduycwldvqspjcwuhoqwe9fhlcjbqvcbhsiauy37wkg() + 100
> b = 100 + akjhvciwfdwkejfc2qweoduycwldvqspjcwuhoqew9fhlcjbqvcbhsiauy37wkg()
>
> How easily can you tell them apart at a glance?
Ouch! Can'
On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 02:51 am, Peter Pearson wrote:
> Seriously, it's cute how neatly normalisation works when you're
> watching closely and using it in the circumstances for which it was
> intended, but that hardly proves that these practices won't cause much
> trouble when they're used more casual
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> No I am not clever/criminal enough to know how to write a text that is
> visually
> close to
> print "Hello World"
> but is internally closer to
> rm -rf /
>
> For me this:
> >>> Α = 1
A = 2
Α + 1 == A
> True
>
>
> is cure enoug
On Friday, April 8, 2016 at 10:13:16 AM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote:
> No I am not clever/criminal enough to know how to write a text that is
> visually
> close to
> print "Hello World"
> but is internally closer to
> rm -rf /
>
> For me this:
> >>> Α = 1
> >>> A = 2
> >>> Α + 1 == A
> True
>
On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 10:22:18 PM UTC+5:30, Peter Pearson wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Apr 2016 11:37:50 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 05:56 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> >> Rustom Mody wrote:
> >
> >>> So here are some examples to illustrate what I am saying:
> >>>
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:51 AM, Peter Pearson wrote:
> The pile-of-poo character was just frosting on
> the cake.
>
> (Sorry to leave you with that image.)
No. You're not even a little bit sorry.
You're an evil, evil man. And funny.
ChrisA
who knows that its codepoint is 1F4A9 without looking i
On Thu, 07 Apr 2016 11:37:50 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 05:56 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Rustom Mody wrote:
>
>>> So here are some examples to illustrate what I am saying:
>>>
>>> Example 1 -- Ligatures:
>>>
>>> Python3 gets it right
>> flag = 1
>> flag
Steven D'Aprano :
> So even in English, capitalisation can make a semantic difference.
It can even make a pronunciation difference: polish vs Polish.
Marko
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 at 23:11 Quivis wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Dec 2015 13:07:38 -0500, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
>
> > I thought that going to Python 3.4 would solve my Unicode issues but it
> > seems I still don't understand this stuff. Here is my script.
> >
> > #! /usr/bin/python3 # -*- coding: UTF-8
1 - 100 of 1314 matches
Mail list logo
