On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 12:05 AM, Phillip Gawlowski
<cmdjackryan / googlemail.com> wrote:
>  Austin Ziegler wrote:
>  | (Yes, Virginia. Most people don't need full-on Unicode munging in
>  | their code. It's necessary when you do need it, but most people don't
>  | need it.)
>  http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/Unicode.html
>
>  I need it. Most of Europe needs it. Not to mention Arabia, Japan, and
>  everybody else not speaking English.

You didn't read what I said. I said "most people don't need full-on
Unicode munging." This is true. There are some cases where it's
absolutely necessary, but most people just need to know that they're
not going to screw up things when they work with Unicode.

You can write Unicode-safe applications without needing full Unicode
string munging. Easily. Most Rails apps should probably be doing
exactly that.

And yes, I do know Unicode. Maybe not as well as Tim Bray, but well
enough to know what's actually needed and what isn't. (I just wrote an
app that deals with UTF-8 Unicode strings; I don't modify them at all,
so I've got a Unicode-safe app in Ruby because I'm not mucking with
things that I don't need to muck with.)

Joel's article is oversimplistic on this, really. I stand by what I
said: most people don't need Unicode munging. But when you need it,
you *really* need it and Ruby can fall down flat for you, pre 1.9.
(And yes, if you look above, that *is* what I said.)

-austin
-- 
Austin Ziegler * halostatue / gmail.com * http://www.halostatue.ca/
 * austin / halostatue.ca * http://www.halostatue.ca/feed/
 * austin / zieglers.ca