Re: "UNICODE BOMBER STRIKES AGAIN"

From: Doug Ewell (dewell@adelphia.net)
Date: Mon Apr 22 2002 - 23:49:26 EDT


Kenneth Whistler <kenw@sybase.com> wrote:

> -- K '\0' e '\0' n '\0'

Lemme see, that's 0x4B 0x00 0x65 0x00 0x6E 0x00.

There's no BOM, and no external tagging as "UTF-16LE," and since this is
the Internet, we don't know the endianness of the originating machine.

So, based on last week's discussion between Ken, Mark Davis, and me, I
am *required* to interpret this sequence as U+4B00 U+6500 U+6E00, or
䬀攀渀.

I'll try, but it won't be easy.

-Doug Ewell
 Fullerton, California



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Apr 23 2002 - 00:24:44 EDT