Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2001
On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 12:45:07AM +0000, Simon Cozens wrote:
> Perl, on most non-EBCDIC platforms, happily assumes that the world is Latin1.
Unless 'use locale'.
> I want to extend this idea to EBCDIC. If you throw around a bunch of EBCDIC
> strings, fine. You don't need to care about that, and Perl will continue to
> operate in the way that it always has done. If you introduce a Unicode string
> into the equation, then things get tricky. Just like with LatinX, Perl will
> upgrade that string to Unicode, passing it through a filter which turns EBCDIC
> code points into Unicode code points.
Again, this is a particular case of 'use locale' situation.
> You can see the parallel? It's very easy. If the LatinX model works, then the
> EBCDIC model works.
Can you please remove LatinX from your description. It confuses me...
Do you mean "any locale"?
> The only spanner in the, um, works is v-strings.
v-thingies are one large problem anyway. I do not have a slightest
idea *why* such an abomination made it into Perl...
> The problem with v-strings is
> that they expect the Unicode code point x to be the same as chr(x), which
> isn't the case for EBCDIC, because the lower 255 codepoints are *not* the same
> as EBCDIC and they are for Latin 1.
Nope. It is not that you break v-thingies. You broke the fundamental
relationship that ord() is transparent w.r.t. byte/utf8
transmogrifations. This is a no-no-no.
The solution is as I proposed. I repeat it:
'use locale' (or working on a EBCDIC machine) switches the table of
cultural info associated to integers in the range 0..255.
That's all. [Well, if you use big-5 locale, then you need to switch
things in the larger region...]
The only problem with this is how to reuse existing (??? do they exist
already?) i/o filters which assume translation-to-Unicode. Two things
are needed:
a) knowledge how to translate locale->Unicode (so recognition of
which Unicode points move into 0..255 rage);
b) a way to reach Unicode points which were in 0..255, but are no more;
(a) is needed anyway for non-use-locale i/o filters, and to solve (b)
I propose to "duplicate" the whole Unicode set outside of UTF-8 range
(but inside utf8 range), say, starting at 80000000.
Ilya
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next