svn commit: r184691 - head/sys/compat/linprocfs
M. Warner Losh
imp at bsdimp.com
Wed Nov 5 15:38:50 PST 2008
In message: <9bbcef730811051526p3a978848uf904a149cb81fbce at mail.gmail.com>
"Ivan Voras" <ivoras at gmail.com> writes:
: 2008/11/5 M. Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com>:
: > In message: <200811051508.mA5F89XD030040 at svn.freebsd.org>
: > Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des at FreeBSD.org> writes:
: > : utf-8
: > Is there some reason to prefer utf-8 over the 8-bit iso character set
: > we were using?
: Reason? You mean you actually *like* 8-bit code pages in the first place? :)
Liked? Not necessarily. Understood: yes. Just didn't have a clue
why the change.
: As a person from a country that has during its history decided it
: really needs 3-4 dots and dashes in its alphabet that make it (the
: alphabet) not representable in ASCII, and who has had Many Fun Days
: converting between various 8-bit code pages, ISO standard or not, and
: especially with deducing which code page is actually being used as all
: bytes are created equal (and Microsoft just *had* to tweak two letters
: from iso8859-2 into Latin2), I welcome UTF-8 with a warm room, a beer,
: peanuts and a backrub.
: UTF-8 (as opposed to old 8-bit code pages which need to die as soon as
: possible and UTF-16 which got itself messed up with endianess) in
: unambiguous. A sequence of proper UTF-8 bytes (and UTF-8 has a
: structure so not every random collection of bytes with the 8th bit set
: is proper UTF-8) can always be linked to the same letter.
: This is why there's such a big push to get systems to properly support
: UTF-8. FreeBSD had a SoC project this year that was supposed to
: properly implement Unicode collations (and thus collation of UTF-8
: strings) but it looks dead or in a dormant state right now (though I
: didn't follow it attentively).
That makes sense.
More information about the svn-src-all