RE: Subject: Re: 32'nd bit & UTF-8

From: Jon Hanna (jon@hackcraft.net)
Date: Thu Jan 20 2005 - 11:09:15 CST

Next message: Peter Constable: "RE: UTF-8 'BOM'"

Previous message: Peter Kirk: "Re: Subject: Re: 32'nd bit & UTF-8"
In reply to: Peter Kirk: "Re: Subject: Re: 32'nd bit & UTF-8"
Next in thread: Hans Aberg: "Re: Subject: Re: 32'nd bit & UTF-8"
Reply: Hans Aberg: "Re: Subject: Re: 32'nd bit & UTF-8"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

> Please stop repeating this allegation, at least unless you have some
> proof that Microsoft was using this format before Unicode
> standardised
> it.

Not likely, apart from the fact that it isn't true, he's getting more
mileage out of it than the 32bit wchar_t bullschildt. Don't feed the trolls.

Regards,
Jon Hanna
Work: <http://www.selkieweb.com/>
Play: <http://www.hackcraft.net/>
Chat: <irc://irc.freenode.net/selkie>

Next message: Peter Constable: "RE: UTF-8 'BOM'"
Previous message: Peter Kirk: "Re: Subject: Re: 32'nd bit & UTF-8"
In reply to: Peter Kirk: "Re: Subject: Re: 32'nd bit & UTF-8"
Next in thread: Hans Aberg: "Re: Subject: Re: 32'nd bit & UTF-8"
Reply: Hans Aberg: "Re: Subject: Re: 32'nd bit & UTF-8"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 20 2005 - 11:11:03 CST