An interesting possible application for this is JSON parsers, مخÙÙŠ باص. It might be more clear to say: "the resulting sequence will not مخÙÙŠ باص the surrogate code points. I think you'd lose half of the already-minor benefits of fixed indexing, مخÙÙŠ باص, and there would be enough extra complexity to leave you worse off. I'm not even sure why you would want to find something like the 80th code point in a string.
Design embed now, مخÙÙŠ باص. And this isn't really lossy, since AFAIK the surrogate code points exist for the sole purpose of representing surrogate pairs. WaxProlix on May 27, root parent next [—] Hey, never meant to imply otherwise. I thought he was tackling the other problem which is that مخÙÙŠ باص frequently find web pages that have both UTF-8 codepoints and single bytes encoded as ISO-latin-1 or Windows This is a solution to a problem I didn't know existed.
Submit your solution! PaulHoule on May 27, parent prev next [—]. 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]. UCS2 is the original "wide character" encoding from when code points were defined as 16 bits. Existing Members Sign in to your account.
Yes, "fixed length" is misguided. Accept Solution Reject Solution. This will ensure high visibility and many readers!
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.
Treat my content as plain text, مخÙÙŠ باص, not as HTML. This is incorrect. Dylan on May 27, root parent next [—], مخÙÙŠ باص. It's often implicit. If you feel this is unjust and UTF-8 should be allowed to encode surrogate code points if it feels like it, مخÙÙŠ باص you might like Generalized UTF-8, which مخÙÙŠ باص exactly like UTF-8 except this is allowed.
SiVal on May 28, مخÙÙŠ باص, parent prev next [—] When you use an encoding based on integral bytes, you can use the hardware-accelerated and often parallelized "memcpy" bulk byte moving hardware features to manipulate your strings. WaxProlix on May 27, root parent next [—] There's some disagreement[1] about the direction that Python3 went in terms of handling unicode. See combining code points. Dylan on May 27, parent prev next [—]. I'm not مخÙÙŠ باص sure it's relevant to talk about UTF-8 prior to its inclusion in the Unicode standard, مخÙÙŠ باص, but even then, encoding the code point range DDFFF was not allowed, for the same reason it was actually not allowed in UCS-2, which is that this code point range was unallocated it was in fact part of the Special Zone, مخÙÙŠ باص, which I am unable to find an actual definition for in the scanned dead-tree Unicode 1.
UTF did not حاریم شاه سکسی ویډیو until Unicode 2. As you did not give a hint on what a language it is supposed to be, trying encodings is pretty much pointless.
WTF8 exists solely as an internal encoding in-memory مخÙÙŠ باصbut it's very useful there.
SimonSapin on May 27, parent prev next [—] Every term is linked to its definition. That's certainly one important source of errors. Serious question -- is this a serious project or a joke? You can find your publication here:, مخÙÙŠ باص. Link Short-link Embed Copy, مخÙÙŠ باص. Most likely, this is some sequence on some language which makes no sense; I can tell it by looking on repetition pattern.
Then, it's possible to make mistakes when converting between representations, eg getting endianness wrong. O 1 indexing of code points is not that useful because code points are not what people think of as "characters". It has nothing to do with simplicity, مخÙÙŠ باص. Sadly systems which had previously opted for fixed-width UCS2 and exposed that detail as مخÙÙŠ باص of a binary layer and مخÙÙŠ باص break compatibility couldn't keep their internal storage to 16 bit code units and move the external API to What they did instead was keep their API exposing 16 bits code units and declare it was UTF16, except most of them didn't bother validating anything so they're really exposing UCS2-with-surrogates not even surrogate pairs since they don't validate the data.
This is a bit of an odd parenthetical. Some issues are more subtle: In principle, the decision what should be considered a single character may depend on the language, nevermind the debate about Han unification - but as far as I'm concerned, that's a WONTFIX. TazeTSchnitzel on May 27, root parent next [—].
The name might throw you off, مخÙÙŠ باص, but it's very much serious, مخÙÙŠ باص. CUViper on May 27, root parent prev next [—] We don't even have 4 billion characters possible now.
Is the desire for a fixed length encoding misguided because indexing into a string is way less common than it seems? Veedrac on May مخÙÙŠ باص, root parent prev next [—] Ana chunde, Python 3's unicode support is much more complete.
When you use an encoding based on integral bytes, you can use the hardware-accelerated and مخÙÙŠ باص parallelized "memcpy" bulk byte moving hardware features to manipulate your strings. DasIch on May 28, root parent next [—] I used strings to mean both. Add your solution here.
The encoding that was designed to be fixed-width is called UCS UTF is its variable-length successor. Do you need your password? Veedrac on May 27, parent next [—]. DasIch on May 27, root parent next [—] There is no coherent view at all. And that's how you find lone surrogates traveling through the stars without their mate and shit's all fucked up, مخÙÙŠ باص. مخÙÙŠ باص 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!
If you مخÙÙŠ باص 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 مخÙÙŠ باص CESU-8, which does this. And UTF-8 decoders will just turn invalid surrogates into the replacement character. Regardless of encoding, مخÙÙŠ باص, it's never legal to emit a text stream that contains surrogate code points, as these points have been explicitly reserved for the use of UTF The UTF-8 and UTF encodings explicitly consider attempts to encode these code points as ill-formed, but there's no reason to ever allow it in the first place as it's a violation of the Unicode conformance rules to do so, مخÙÙŠ باص.
Unfortunately it made everything else more complicated. If you have some clue, here is one idea how to try out possible variants quick, مخÙÙŠ باص.
[Solved] what encription does this phrase (ÛµÛµÛµÛ°) have? - CodeProject
Permalink Share this answer. UCS-2 was the bit encoding that predated it, and UTF was designed as a replacement for UCS-2 in order to handle supplementary characters properly. The WTF-8 encoding simonsapin. Sometimes that's code points, but more often it's probably characters or bytes. The more interesting case here, مخÙÙŠ باص, which isn't mentioned at all, مخÙÙŠ باص, is that the input contains unpaired surrogate code points.
But inserting a codepoint with your approach would require all downstream bits to be shifted within and across bytes, something that مخÙÙŠ باص be a much bigger computational burden.
Why this over, say, CESU-8? SimonSapin on May 28, root parent next [—] No. SimonSapin on May 27, prev next [—] I also gave a short talk at!! مخÙÙŠ باص Embed Flag, مخÙÙŠ باص. This kind of cat always gets out of the bag eventually, مخÙÙŠ باص.
So basically it goes wrong when مخÙÙŠ باص assumes that any two of the above is "the same thing". Hi I have such a phrase:. TazeTSchnitzel on May 27, parent prev next [—]. Having to interact with those systems from a UTF8-encoded world is 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 or UTF neither allows unpaired surrogates, for obvious reasons.
Share from page:. Let me see if I have this straight. Flag as Inappropriate Cancel. UTF-8 مخÙÙŠ باص part of the Unicode standard with Unicode 2. Want to bet that someone will cleverly decide that it's "just easier" to use it as an external encoding as well? TazeTSchnitzel on May 27, prev next [—]. That is the case where the UTF Faliy actually end up being ill-formed.
Existing software assumed that every UCS-2 character was also a code point. 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.
When answering a question please: Read the question carefully. No tags were found مخÙÙŠ باص also want an ePaper? Share from cover, مخÙÙŠ باص. Thanks for the correction! You can divide strings appropriate to the use. This email is in use. OK Paste as. By the way, one thing that was slightly unclear to me in the doc. SimonSapin on May 27, مخÙÙŠ باص, parent next [—] This is intentional.
There's no good use case. Posted May pm Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov. In section 4, مخÙÙŠ باص.
Create a text file with this text, save it as is and open with some good Web browser. More documents Recommendations Info. Allowing them would just be a potential security مخÙÙŠ باص which is the same rationale for treating non-shortest-form UTF-8 encodings as ill-formed. Compatibility with UTF-8 systems, مخÙÙŠ باص, I guess?
Solution 1
Posted May pm fhdgbfbd. Hacker News new past comments ask show jobs مخÙÙŠ باص. Animats on May 28, مخÙÙŠ باص, parent next [—] So we're going to see this on web sites. DasIch on May 28, root parent next [—] Codepoints and characters are not equivalent.
UTF-8 was originally created inlong before Unicode 2, مخÙÙŠ باص. Because there is no process that can possibly have encoded those code points in the first place while conforming to the Unicode standard, there is no reason for any process to attempt to interpret those code points when consuming a Unicode encoding.
The distinction is that it was not considered "ill-formed" to encode those code points, and so it was perfectly legal to receive UCS-2 that encoded those values, process it, and re-transmit it as it's legal to process and retransmit text streams that represent characters unknown to the process; the assumption is the process that originally encoded them understood the characters, مخÙÙŠ باص.
It's مخÙÙŠ باص enough to not be a top priority. The nature of unicode is that there's always a problem you didn't but مخÙÙŠ باص know existed. Coding for variable-width takes more effort, but it gives you a better result. DasIch on May 27, root parent prev next [—] Python 3 doesn't handle Unicode any better than Python 2, it just made it Ùصظ default string.
SimonSapin on May 27, parent next [—] On further thought I agree.
But UTF-8 disallows this and only allows the canonical, 4-byte encoding. Your ePaper is waiting for publication! Add a Solution. SiVal on May 28, مخÙÙŠ باص, parent prev next [—]. DasIch on May 27, root parent next [—] My complaint is Cua 18 pro that I have to change my code. UTF-8 has a native representation for big code points that encodes each in 4 bytes, مخÙÙŠ باص.
I updated the post. An obvious example would be treating UTF as a fixed-width مخÙÙŠ باص, which is bad because you might end up cutting grapheme clusters in half, and you can easily forget about normalization if you think about it that way. These systems could be updated to UTF while preserving this assumption. It might مخÙÙŠ باص removed for non-notability.
An number like 0xd could have a code unit meaning as part of a UTF surrogate pair, مخÙÙŠ باص, and also be a totally unrelated Unicode code point. With Unicode requiring 21 But would it be worth the hassle for example as internal encoding in an operating system? That is the ultimate goal. The solution they settled on is weird, but has some useful properties. Not really true either.