Richard Wordingham wrote:
> You're assuming that the source of the non-conformance is external to
> the program. In the case that has caused me to ask about lone
> surrogates, they were actually caused by a faulty character deletion
> function within the program itself.
I've been bemused by all this discussion about how unpaired surrogates
are supposed to behave, and this comment just cleared everything up for
me. We're talking about a bug. Very well, then, the answer is that the
bug should be fixed.
-- Doug Ewell | http://ewellic.org | Thornton, CO 🇺🇸Received on Tue Oct 13 2015 - 09:47:18 CDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Oct 13 2015 - 09:47:18 CDT