From: Doug Ewell (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Jun 29 2009 - 20:50:35 CDT
Adam Twardoch <list dot adam at twardoch dot com> wrote:
>> 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.
> Right. But the point is, U+0000 is a valid Unicode codepoint, the
> NULL. It may be part of a Unicode string. It may be of limited use,
> but it is a codepoint. Using a codepoint for termination is not the
> best idea.
> U+FFFF is not a valid Unicode codepoint, it's not part of Unicode. It
> may not be part of a Unicode string. So by definition, it can be used
> for termination.
I see. Yes, you're right: in developing his own system, he is choosing
to use U+0000 as a string terminator and was worried that it might pop
up unexpectedly, whereas if he chose U+FFFF instead, he would not have
that worry. Sorry it took so long for me to catch on.
-- Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://www.ewellic.org http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages ˆ
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 29 2009 - 20:52:52 CDT