Hi,

I think you're quite a little pessimist here :)

Until my post on this subject, I have never been complaining far from that,
and enjoyed to play with ,  and so on.

And I was not complaining, jsut asking how to solve that (The fact it didn't
handle the normalization form C is quite logical I think, no language would
do that easily).

I think having Unicode support is something very useful. Look for
example(even if it is a bad one) PHP and mb_* functions and all encoding
functions, scary, no? Well, I think it's quite intuitive how it is for the
moment, and most of the time doing concatenation is not a problem at all.

So, globally I think a good encoding support is really important, while
being not useful everyday.

Regards,

B.D.

2009/12/29 Brian Candler <b.candler / pobox.com>

> Tony Arcieri wrote:
> > To play devil's advocate here, Japanese users do routinely have to deal
> > with
> > multiple different encodings... Shift JIS on Windows/Mac, EUC-JP on *IX,
> > and
> > ISO-2022-JP for email
>
> Sure; and maybe they even want to process these formats without a
> round-trip to UTF8. (By the way, ruby 1.9 *can't* handle Shift JIS
> natively)
>
> I want a programming language which (a) handles strings of bytes, and
> (b) does so with simple, understandable, and predictable semantics: for
> example, concat string 1 with string 2 to make string 3. Is that too
> much to ask?
>
> Anyway, I'll shut up now.
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
>
>