And unfortunately, I'm not anymore enlightened as to my misunderstanding. Guessing an encoding based on the locale or the content of the file should be the exception and something the caller does explicitly.
Arabic character encoding problem
It's rare enough to not be a top priority. Yes, "fixed length" is misguided. Why wouldn't this work, apart from already existing applications that does not know how to do this. If I slice سکس شاهی I expect a slice of characters. Any ideas? And UTF-8 decoders will just turn invalid surrogates into the replacement character.
Right, ok. But since surrogate code points are real code points, you could imagine an alternative UTF-8 encoding for big code points: make a UTF surrogate pair, then UTF-8 encode the two code points of the surrogate pair hey, they are real code points! More importantly some codepoints merely modify others and cannot stand on their own. My complaint is not that I have to change my code.
The solution they settled on is weird, but has some useful properties. Can someone explain this in laymans terms? With Kerala musilim requiring 21 But would it القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء worth the hassle for example as internal encoding in an operating system?
So I am attempting to do this for custom presets. When you say "strings" are you referring to strings or bytes? Hey, never meant to imply otherwise. We would only waste 1 bit per القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء, which seems reasonable given just how many problems encoding usually represent. Having to interact with those systems from a UTF8-encoded world Daddy and.daugthee an issue because they don't guarantee well-formed UTF, they might contain unpaired surrogates which can't be decoded to a codepoint allowed in UTF-8 القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء UTF neither allows unpaired surrogates, for obvious reasons, القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء.
Let me see if I have this straight. Well, Python 3's unicode support is much more complete. In fact, even people who have issues with the py3 way often agree that it's still better than 2's. Why this over, say, CESU-8? Existing software assumed that every UCS-2 character was also a code point.
If you like Generalized UTF-8, except that you always want to use surrogate pairs for big code points, and you want to totally disallow the UTFnative 4-byte sequence for them, you might like CESU-8, which does this.
You could still open it as raw bytes if required. On top of that implicit coercions have been replaced with implicit broken guessing of encodings for example when opening files. They failed to achieve both goals. Dylan on May 27, parent prev next [—]. Just tested your test script on mac and I get the full text. That's certainly one important source of errors. I used strings to mean both. A character can consist of one or more codepoints. Python Bollywood actress removing cloths only gives you a codepoint-level perspective, القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء.
Veedrac on May 27, parent next [—].
I understand that for efficiency we want this to be as fast as possible. SimonSapin on May 27, root parent prev next [—]. SiVal on May 28, parent prev next [—]. Some issues are more subtle: In principle, the decision what should be considered NOUR sleim single character may depend on the language, nevermind the debate about Han unification - but as far as I'm concerned, that's a WONTFIX.
This was gibberish to me too. Or is some of my above understanding incorrect. PaulHoule on May القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء, parent prev next [—]. I think you'd lose half of the already-minor benefits of fixed indexing, and there would be enough extra complexity to leave you worse off, القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء.
Coding for variable-width takes more effort, but it gives you a better result. Then, it's possible to make mistakes when القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء between representations, eg getting endianness wrong. You can look at unicode strings from different perspectives and see a sequence of codepoints or a sequence of characters, both can be reasonable depending on what you want to do.
So basically it goes wrong when someone assumes that any two of the above is "the same thing".
I thought he was tackling the other problem which is that you frequently find web pages that have both UTF-8 codepoints and single bytes encoded القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء ISO-latin-1 or Windows This is a solution to a problem I didn't know existed.
Dylan on May 27, root parent next [—]. But UTF-8 disallows this and only allows the canonical, 4-byte encoding. If I seek to byte 14 I get a portion of text up until it encounters white space.
Repair utf-8 strings that contain iso encoded utf-8 characters В· GitHub
The nature of unicode is that there's always a problem you didn't but should know existed. I have to disagree, القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء, I think using Unicode in Python 3 is currently easier than in any language I've used. And I mean, I can't really think of any cross-locale requirements fulfilled by unicode. In all other aspects the situation has stayed as bad as it was in Python 2 or has gotten significantly worse.
Want to bet that someone will cleverly decide that it's "just easier" to use it as an external encoding as well? Because not everyone gets Unicode right, real-world data may contain unpaired surrogates, and WTF-8 is an extension Pakistani Tiktoker viral video full sex UTF-8 that handles such data gracefully. Serious question -- is this a serious project or a joke? TazeTSchnitzel on May 27, prev next [—].
Would you be able to run it again with a Code: Select all alert file. It isn't a position based on ignorance. That is not quite true, in the sense that more of the standard library has been made unicode-aware, and implicit conversions between unicode and bytestrings have been removed. Python 3 doesn't handle Unicode any better than Python 2, it just made it the default string. You can divide strings appropriate to the use.
This was presumably deemed simpler that only restricting pairs, القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء. Filesystem paths is the latter, it's text on OSX and Windows — although possibly ill-formed in Windows — but it's bag-o-bytes in most unices. Post Wed Feb 03, am Yea I have read over it. It also has the advantage of breaking in less random ways than unicode. Why shouldn't you slice or index them? It might be removed for non-notability.
Codepoints and characters are not equivalent. SimonSapin on May 27, القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء prev next [—]. Now we have a Python 3 that's incompatible to Python 2 but provides almost no significant benefit, solves none of the large well known problems and introduces quite a few new problems.
Simple compression can take care of the wastefulness of using excessive space to encode text - so it القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء only leaves efficiency. But inserting a codepoint with your approach would require all downstream bits to be shifted within and across bytes, something that would be a much bigger computational burden.
People used to think 16 bits would be enough for anyone. Veedrac on May 27, root parent prev next [—]. It slices by codepoints? Byte strings can be sliced and indexed no problems because a byte as such is something you may actually want to deal with. Guessing encodings when opening files is a problem precisely because - as you mentioned - the caller should specify the encoding, not just sometimes but always. Bytes still have methods like. On the guessing encodings when opening files, القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء, that's not really a problem.
This is all gibberish to me. That was the piece I was missing. If you don't know the encoding of the file, how can you decode it? SimonSapin on May 28, parent next [—]. Sometimes that's code points, but more often it's probably characters or bytes.
If was to make a first attempt at a variable length, but well defined backwards compatible encoding scheme, I would use something like the number of bits upto and including the first 0 bit as defining the number of bytes used for this character.
Ah yes, the JavaScript solution. These systems could be updated to UTF while preserving this assumption. Python 3 pretends that paths can be represented as unicode strings on all OSes, that's not true. There's no good use case.
The WTF-8 encoding | Hacker News
There's not a ton of local IO, but I've upgraded all my personal projects to Python 3. On further thought I agree. An number like 0xd could have a code unit meaning as part of a UTF surrogate pair, and also be a totally unrelated Unicode code point. As the user of unicode I don't really care about that.
The numeric value of these code units denote codepoints that lie themselves within the BMP. Because we want our encoding schemes to be equivalent, the Unicode code space contains a hole where these so-called surrogates lie.
That is, you can jump to the middle of a stream and find the next code point by looking at no more than 4 bytes. Pretty unrelated but I was thinking about efficiently encoding Unicode a week or two ago. Python 2 handling of paths is not good because there is no My sister in bad abstraction over different operating systems, treating them as byte strings is a sane lowest common denominator though.
Therefore, القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء, the concept of Unicode scalar value was introduced and Unicode text was restricted to not contain any surrogate code point. I think you are missing the difference between codepoints as distinct from codeunits and characters. Your complaint, القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء, and the complaint of the OP, seems to be basically, "It's different and I have to change my code, therefore it's bad.
Post Tue Feb 02, am Thanks for testing it Atleast it narrows down the issue. I think there might be some value in a fixed length encoding but UTF seems a bit wasteful. This kind of cat always gets out of the bag eventually. You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post. Basically I think I need to read the contents of a GIF file as data, or القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء, then encode that as base64 and insert it into the metadata of the preset file.
How is any of that in conflict with my original points? That is the ultimate goal. That is held up with a very leaky abstraction and means that Python code that treats paths as unicode strings and not as paths-that-happen-to-be-unicode-but-really-arent is broken. You can also index, slice and iterate over strings, all operations that you really shouldn't do unless you really now what you are doing. That is a unicode string that cannot be encoded or rendered in any meaningful way.
I'm not even sure القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء you would want to find something like the 80th code point in a string. Unfortunately it made everything else more complicated. Compatibility with UTF-8 systems, I guess? There is no coherent view at all. There Python 2 is only "better" in that issues will probably fly under the radar if you don't prod things too much.
Fortunately it's not something I deal with often but thanks for the info, will stop me getting caught out later. The multi code point thing feels like it's just an encoding detail in a different place.
Arabic character encoding problem
It requires all the extra shifting, dealing with the potentially partially filled last 64 bits and encoding and decoding to and from the external world. Maybe its a encoding issue, and I don't have the correct encoding on my system. I certainly have spent Rusty trombone little time struggling with it.
Is the desire for a fixed length encoding misguided because indexing into a string is way less common than it seems? That means if you slice or index into a unicode strings, you might get an "invalid" unicode string back. Man, what was the drive behind adding that extra complexity to life?! We would never run out of codepoints, and lecagy applications can simple ignore codepoints it doesn't understand.
Slicing or indexing into unicode strings is a problem because it's not clear what unicode strings are strings of. If you feel this is unjust and UTF-8 should be allowed to encode surrogate code points if it feels like it, then you might like Generalized UTF-8, which is exactly like UTF-8 except this is allowed.
An obvious example would be treating UTF as a fixed-width encoding, which is bad because you might end up cutting grapheme clusters in half, and you can easily A sister fun with brother about normalization if you think about it that way, القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء.
An interesting possible application for this القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء JSON parsers. Post Tue Feb 02, pm Here you go.
The name might throw you off, but it's very much serious. It seems like those operations make sense in either case but I'm sure I'm missing something. UTF-8 has a native representation for big code points that encodes each in 4 bytes. I guess you need some operations to get to those details if you need. My complaint is that Python 3 is an attempt at breaking as little compatibilty with Python 2 as possible while making Unicode "easy" to use.
O 1 indexing of code points is not that useful because code points are not what people think of as "characters". The API in no way indicates that doing any of these things is a problem, القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء.
المقدمة الØضرمية
DasIch on May 27, root parent prev next [—]. Thanks for explaining. DasIch on May 28, root parent next [—]. See combining code points. It certainly isn't perfect, but it's better than the alternatives. The caller should specify the encoding manually ideally.
I've been testing it a little more and if i 'seek' to a specific byte number before reading the data, I can read parts of it in. I have tried to read it with a bunch of different encodings but get the same result each time. It seems whenever there is some whitespace like directly after the GIF89a partit stops reading it.
القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء of the time however you certainly don't want to deal with codepoints. WTF8 exists solely as an internal encoding in-memory representationbut it's very useful there. The name is unserious but the project is very serious, its writer has responded to a few comments and linked to a presentation of his on the subject[0]. It's often implicit. Good examples for that are paths and anything that relates to local IO when you're locale is C.
Maybe this has been your experience, but it hasn't been mine, القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء. DasIch on May 27, root parent next [—]. When you use an encoding based on integral bytes, القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء, you can use the hardware-accelerated and often parallelized "memcpy" bulk byte moving hardware features to manipulate your strings.
Most people aren't aware of that at all and it's definitely surprising. So Lexilore sliping sa bed you're working in either domain you get a coherent view, the problem being when you're interacting with systems or concepts which straddle the divide or even worse may be in either domain depending on the platform. I get that every different thing character is a different Unicode number code point.
TazeTSchnitzel on May 27, parent prev next [—]. And because of this global confusion, everyone important ends up implementing something that somehow does something moronic - so then everyone else has yet another problem they didn't know existed and they all fall into a self-harming spiral of depravity.
TazeTSchnitzel on May 27, root parent next [—]. Every term is القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء to its definition.
That's just silly, so we've gone through this whole unicode everywhere process so we can stop thinking about the underlying implementation details but the api forces you to have to deal with them anyway.
I القذ٠داخل طيز الاخت الشقراء you have a policy of not reply to people so maybe someone else could step in and clear up my confusion. As a trivial example, case conversions now cover the whole unicode range.