[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Fix u32toutf8 so it encodes values > 0xFFFF correctly.
From: |
Chet Ramey |
Subject: |
Re: Fix u32toutf8 so it encodes values > 0xFFFF correctly. |
Date: |
Mon, 20 Feb 2012 21:42:01 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 |
On 2/18/12 5:39 AM, John Kearney wrote:
> Bash Version: 4.2
> Patch Level: 10
> Release Status: release
>
> Description:
> Current u32toutf8 only encode values below 0xffff correctly.
> wchar_t can be ambiguous size better in my opinion to use
> unsigned long, or uint32_t, or something clearer.
Thanks for the patch. It's good to have a complete implementation,
though as a practical matter you won't see UTF-8 characters longer
than four bytes. I agree with you about the unsigned 32-bit int
type; wchar_t is signed, even if it's 32 bits, on several systems
I use.
Chet
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU chet@case.edu http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/
- Fix u32toutf8 so it encodes values > 0xFFFF correctly., John Kearney, 2012/02/18
- Re: Fix u32toutf8 so it encodes values > 0xFFFF correctly.,
Chet Ramey <=
- Re: Fix u32toutf8 so it encodes values > 0xFFFF correctly., Eric Blake, 2012/02/21
- Re: Fix u32toutf8 so it encodes values > 0xFFFF correctly., John Kearney, 2012/02/21
- Re: Fix u32toutf8 so it encodes values > 0xFFFF correctly., Chet Ramey, 2012/02/21
- Initial test code for \U, John Kearney, 2012/02/21
- Here is a diff of all the changed to the unicode, John Kearney, 2012/02/21
- Re: Initial test code for \U, Chet Ramey, 2012/02/22
- Re: Initial test code for \U, Eric Blake, 2012/02/22
- Re: Initial test code for \U, John Kearney, 2012/02/26
- Re: Fix u32toutf8 so it encodes values > 0xFFFF correctly., Linda Walsh, 2012/02/22
- Re: Fix u32toutf8 so it encodes values > 0xFFFF correctly., Eric Blake, 2012/02/22