Re: Zero termination

From: Doug Ewell (
Date: Mon Jun 29 2009 - 20:37:29 CDT

  • Next message: Adam Twardoch: "Re: Zero termination"

    Adam Twardoch <list dot adam at twardoch dot com> wrote:

    >>> If you want to process *any arbitrary sequence of Unicode
    >>> characters* as a string, then you may have problems with U+0000 --
    >>> but that would have been true if you wanted to process any arbitrary
    >>> sequence of bytes as an ASCII string.
    >> In such a case, one usually uses U+FFFF, which is guaranteed not to
    >> be a valid Unicode code point.
    > Indeed, I think it is a much better idea than using U+0000. And is
    > just as easy to remember ;)

    I think the original poster's point was that he didn't know what his
    input would look like, let alone have control over it.

    Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14  ˆ

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 29 2009 - 20:40:03 CDT