On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 9:15 AM, Thomas Kellerer
<YQDHXVLMUBXG / spammotel.com> wrote:
> Bill Kelly, 08.04.2008 14:51:
> > > Unicode (and a relevant encoding such as UTF8) should be the *standard*
> > > for all (new) programming languages and not an exception.
> > Apparently not, as One Character Encoding to Rule Them All is not
> > considered satisfactory to many people.
> But Unicode/UTF8 would at least satisfy a *lot* more people than plain
> ASCII or 8bit encodings (such as ISO-8859-x)

> > Here's a long thread on the subject from the archives: http://tinyurl.com/ge2kp

Please read the thread that Bill pointed you to. It explains a lot
more than you'd think there would be. (And yes, that's a thread that I
was heavily involved in.)

> > Ruby 1.9 has much broader support for handling multiple character
> > encodings.
>  Is there any release plan for 1.9?

When it's ready. 1.9.0 has already been released and there's ongoing
patches to make it better. Follow ruby-core if you want more
information about Ruby 1.9. Matz still recommends Ruby 1.8.x for
production because there may be other incompatible changes with Ruby
1.9, but most of the breakers should be fixed. But it's running on a
(newish) VM, so it's something to work with for exercising the
language. I think that when 1.9.1 comes out, it'll be much closer to
production quality.

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