Picking Apart the Crashing iOS String

Post by School-Cotton » Fri, Feb 16, 2018, 12:40 AM UTC

Someone1234 wrote: post #94

Manishearth wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can answer your question for Devanagari: - You normally think of clusters as single "letters". The word for them in Marathi is "joined letter". This notion of "letter" may not be totally in line with what English speakers would expect. - You still think of clusters as having component parts that make it up. However, क्ष/ज्ञ and sometimes त्र are thought of as their own "fundamental" consonants even though they're c…

As someone who can read both Devanagari and English/Latin script, I'm just curious, when you read Devanagari does the text size need to be larger for good comprehension? There seems more subtlety with the word structure, like tiny little flicks which seem to have significant meaning. While Latin-like script has characters like the comma/full-stop, and modifiers like the dot on the i, these are far rarer than Devanaga…

Post by Manishearth » Fri, Feb 16, 2018, 12:43 AM UTC

Someone1234 wrote: post #94

Manishearth wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can answer your question for Devanagari: - You normally think of clusters as single "letters". The word for them in Marathi is "joined letter". This notion of "letter" may not be totally in line with what English speakers would expect. - You still think of clusters as having component parts that make it up. However, क्ष/ज्ञ and sometimes त्र are thought of as their own "fundamental" consonants even though they're c…

As someone who can read both Devanagari and English/Latin script, I'm just curious, when you read Devanagari does the text size need to be larger for good comprehension? There seems more subtlety with the word structure, like tiny little flicks which seem to have significant meaning. While Latin-like script has characters like the comma/full-stop, and modifiers like the dot on the i, these are far rarer than Devanaga…

Post by Manishearth » Fri, Feb 16, 2018, 12:47 AM UTC

dkarl wrote: post #43

jcranmer wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Latin text gives people a misleading idea as to how simple text is. For Latin, each character is generally an independent unit with independent metrics isolated from its environment, with a small set of exceptions to this rule (ligatures). East Asian ideographs bring up interesting questions about what constitutes a character, with Unicode "solving" the problem by saying "every distinct rendering is a distinct charac…

So far, if I understand correctly, nobody knows of a sequence of characters you could write down in any language that would trigger a crash when encoded in Unicode in a straightforward way. That suggests that the invariant being assumed may come, ironically, from a deep understanding of the scripts rather than ignorance.

Post by torstenvl » Fri, Feb 16, 2018, 12:48 AM UTC

Post by School-Cotton » Fri, Feb 16, 2018, 12:53 AM UTC

dkarl wrote: post #43

jcranmer wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Latin text gives people a misleading idea as to how simple text is. For Latin, each character is generally an independent unit with independent metrics isolated from its environment, with a small set of exceptions to this rule (ligatures). East Asian ideographs bring up interesting questions about what constitutes a character, with Unicode "solving" the problem by saying "every distinct rendering is a distinct charac…

So far, if I understand correctly, nobody knows of a sequence of characters you could write down in any language that would trigger a crash when encoded in Unicode in a straightforward way. That suggests that the invariant being assumed may come, ironically, from a deep understanding of the scripts rather than ignorance.