Re: Zero termination

From: Doug Ewell (
Date: Mon Jun 29 2009 - 20:50:35 CDT

  • Next message: Asmus Freytag: "Re: Zero termination"

    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  ˆ

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 29 2009 - 20:52:52 CDT