Re: unicode char ranges

[Daurnimator <quae@...>]

On 4 December 2012 17:37, Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@gmail.com> wrote:
> Bogus, wrong, poor, limited, useless.
>
> Nobody needs more than a poor and limited subset. The actual
> subset varies according to context, granted.
>
As everyone needs a different subset; this makes sharing of code implausible.
If he is working on a library, then he cannot control what his users
(who may be programmers themselves) use as input.

> Bogus, wrong, poor, limited, useless.
>
> I work with text that was originally composed in ISO8859-1 or Windows
> 1252 and brutally translated by iconv.  My original
> comment said "this is what I do".  I find it useful for, as I said,
> "key generation, indexing, alphabetic sorting etc ".
>
Great, but this is probably a VERY confined use.
Presenting it as a feasible general solution is reckless.

>> Actually you deserve a U+1F44A for this ;)
>
> In the font used by my e-mail reader, which by the way has
> no problems in displaying Chinese, Korean and Arabic,
> I just get a rectangle containing the six digits, so I cannot
> grasp the doubtless brilliant import of the remark.
>
> Bogus, wrong, poor, limited, useless.
>

Turning this into a flamewar is not productive; so I will stop here.
I can't condone either of your behaviour's. We should be civil.
But even MORE important is to be productive, correct, general and useful