On Sat Mar 24 14:28:54 2012, public@khwilliamson.com wrote: > On 03/24/2012 02:27 PM, Father Chrysostomos via RT wrote: > > What the patch does is stop > > > > use utf8; > > $foo = "\N{ÿ}"; > > > > from being interpreted as "\N{ÿ}", where the former is \xff in a UTF-8 > > source file, and the latter is the UTF-8 octet sequence for \xff > > interpreted as Latin-1. > > That sounds reasonable. > > > > > If there are to be more changes later to \N{...}, I don’t know that it’s > > so necessary to include this patch now. > > > > I'm saying we *should not* include it until we have made the changes to > \N{} that restrict the characters used in the name to be legitimate > ones. Otherwise, we have a back compat problem when we do make those > changes. Since none of these can work now, there isn't an issue until > this patch is applied. > > However, a simple change for 5.16 to accommodate this patch could be to > just forbid explicitly all above-Latin1 characters. Code exists > currently to check the Latin1 characters even in UTF-8 (though it may > never have been tested because of this bug). In a later release we > could relax this requirement. > > I'm willing to make this change and test if it is deemed desirable in 5.16. > > The rule for Latin1 characters is that a name must begin with an > alphabetic, and contain only \w plus space, no-break space, parentheses > (because of existing Unicode names), and colons (because the name could > be of the form: 'Greek: alpha'). > I’m not sure which is the best way to proceed. I would suggest leaving this particular patch out. So I supposed rjbs should make the decision. -- Father Chrysostomos --- via perlbug: queue: perl5 status: open https://rt.perl.org:443/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=107008Thread Previous | Thread Next