Re: Opinions on this Java URL?

From: Philippe Verdy (
Date: Sun Nov 14 2004 - 17:45:56 CST

  • Next message: Peter Kirk: "Re: Opinions on this Java URL?"

    Doug Ewell said:
    > instead of overloading the string type. Strings are for text. Text
    > does not need nulls.

    Nulls are legal Unicode characters, also for use in plain text and since
    ever in ASCII, and all ISO 8-bit charset standards. Why do you want that a
    legal Unicode string containing NULL (U+0000) *characters* become illegal
    when converted to C strings?

    A null *CHARACTER* is valid in C string, because C does not mandate the
    string encoding (which varies according to locale conventions at run-time).

    It just assigns a special role to the null *BYTE* as a end-of-string

    There are many reasons why one would want to store null *characters* in C
    strings, using a proper escaping mechanism (a transport syntax like the
    transformation of 00 generated by UTF-8, into C080) or an encoding scheme
    (UTF-8 does not fit here, one needs another scheme like the Sun modified

    And I don't consider this to be "broken" encoding. It's just another
    encoding, fully compatible with Unicode *and* with C string conventions.
    Using pure UTF-8 in C strings would not be conforming to either Unicode or C
    conventions because it will illegitimately restrict the legal embedding of
    U+0000 in strings...

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Nov 14 2004 - 17:51:14 CST