Hi all,
Following this past conversation, I decided to reinstate rune validity
checks in libutf. Since people seem to be using my repo as a
submodule, I decided it was best to cater for that (somewhat
questionable) use case.
> I would have liked to have separated UTF-8 and Unicode support into tw
On Wed, 01 Jun 2016, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> So the question is whether libutf is meant to deal only with UTF-8
> (which is constant), or other Unicode features too (which are
> dynamic).
My point is, whenever possible, make the library user's life better.
Frozen implementation? It'd be nice
On 1 June 2016 at 18:43, Kamil Cholewiński wrote:
> The 95% use case here is handling UTF8-encoded Unicode text. Secure by
> default should be the norm, not a magic flag, not buried in a readme.
Obviously nobody is arguing for magic flags or burying things in a readme.
> If you need to encode an
> On Jun 1, 2016, at 10:43 AM, Kamil Cholewiński wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016, Ben Woolley wrote:
>> That is the reason why I am erring on the side of 5% this time.
>
> The 95% use case here is handling UTF8-encoded Unicode text. Secure by
> default should be the norm, not a magic flag, no
On Wed, 01 Jun 2016, Ben Woolley wrote:
> That is the reason why I am erring on the side of 5% this time.
The 95% use case here is handling UTF8-encoded Unicode text. Secure by
default should be the norm, not a magic flag, not buried in a readme.
If you need to encode an arbitrarily large intege
> On Jun 1, 2016, at 9:12 AM, Kamil Cholewiński wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016, Ben Woolley wrote:
>> I see two things to do:
>> 1. There could be a new name for the transformation that stands apart
>> from UTF-8, which has now been changed from that original meaning.
>> [...]
>>
>> Maybe ca
On Wed, 01 Jun 2016, Ben Woolley wrote:
> I see two things to do:
> 1. There could be a new name for the transformation that stands apart
> from UTF-8, which has now been changed from that original meaning.
> [...]
>
> Maybe call the transform CTF-8, where C is character. Then UTF-8 is
> just a wr
>> On Jun 1, 2016, at 1:51 AM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
>>
>> On 1 June 2016 at 07:42, Ben Woolley wrote:
>> I am pretty sure you are aware of this already, but the UTF-8 RFC
>> defines Unicode quirks as part of the UTF-8 definition. Even the title
>> is "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO 1
On 1 June 2016 at 07:42, Ben Woolley wrote:
> I am pretty sure you are aware of this already, but the UTF-8 RFC
> defines Unicode quirks as part of the UTF-8 definition. Even the title
> is "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO 10646". It does not call it a
> general purpose transformation format
> On May 31, 2016, at 11:33 AM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
>
>> On 31 May 2016 at 18:43, FRIGN wrote:
>> as a quick note, the sbase libutf is probably the most feature-rich one.
>> The version by cls suffers from multiple issues, even though it might
>> be the most recent.
>
> Strictly speaking
On 31 May 2016 at 18:43, FRIGN wrote:
> as a quick note, the sbase libutf is probably the most feature-rich one.
> The version by cls suffers from multiple issues, even though it might
> be the most recent.
Strictly speaking they're all by me, since I started it (and sbase) in
the first place. Bu
On Tue, 31 May 2016 10:25:22 -0300
Marc Collin wrote:
Hey Marc,
> Looking at libutf, I realised there are many versions?
> There's an outdated version on the suckless repo by cls[0].
> Thee's an up-to-date version on cls private github[1].
> There's a fork on sbase[2].
> Is there a reason for th
Marc -- I remember now that you emailed me about this, and it must
have slipped my mind. Sorry about that.
I personally have no strong opinion on what should be done with the
different repos, since I consider libutf to be mostly a pet project;
and I don't think there's any problem with sbase havin
Hey suckless.
Looking at libutf, I realised there are many versions?
There's an outdated version on the suckless repo by cls[0].
Thee's an up-to-date version on cls private github[1].
There's a fork on sbase[2].
Is there a reason for the fragmentation? Which is the prefered libutf version?
Thanks
14 matches
Mail list logo
