It’s not wrong that "\u{1F926}\u{1F3FC}\u200D\u2642\uFE0F".length == 7 (2019)
1–10 of 287 posts
Re: It’s not wrong that "\u{1F926}\u{1F3FC}\u200D\u2642\uFE0F".length == 7 (2019)
#2ironic that unicode is stripped out the post's title here, making it very much wrong ;)
for context, the actual post features an emoji with multiple unicode codepoints in between the quotes
Re: It’s not wrong that "\u{1F926}\u{1F3FC}\u200D\u2642\uFE0F".length == 7 (2019)
#3>We’ve seen four different lengths so far:
Number of UTF-8 code units (17 in this case) Number of UTF-16 code units (7 in this case) Number of UTF-32 code units or Unicode scalar values (5 in this case) Number of extended grapheme clusters (1 in this case)
We would not have this problem if we all agree to return number of bytes instead.
Edit: My mistake. There would still be inconsistency between different encoding. My point is, if we all decided to report number of bytes that string used instead number of printable characters, we would not have the inconsistency between languages.
Re: It’s not wrong that "\u{1F926}\u{1F3FC}\u200D\u2642\uFE0F".length == 7 (2019)
#4I'd disagree the number of unicode scalars is useless (in the case of python3), but it's a very interesting article nonetheless. Too bad unicode.org decided to break all the URLs in the table at the end.
Re: It’s not wrong that "\u{1F926}\u{1F3FC}\u200D\u2642\uFE0F".length == 7 (2019)
#5ironic that unicode is stripped out the post's title here, making it very much wrong ;) for context, the actual post features an emoji with multiple unicode codepoints in between the quotes
Funny enough I clicked on the post wondering how it could possibly be that a single space was length 7.
Re: It’s not wrong that "\u{1F926}\u{1F3FC}\u200D\u2642\uFE0F".length == 7 (2019)
#6(2019) updated in (2022)
Re: It’s not wrong that "\u{1F926}\u{1F3FC}\u200D\u2642\uFE0F".length == 7 (2019)
#7>We’ve seen four different lengths so far: Number of UTF-8 code units (17 in this case) Number of UTF-16 code units (7 in this case) Number of UTF-32 code units or Unicode scalar values (5 in this case) Number of extended grapheme clusters (1 in this case) We would not have this problem if we all agree to return number of bytes instead. Edit: My mistake. There would still be inconsistency between different encoding.…
How would that help? UTF-8, 16, and 32 languages would still report different numbers.
Re: It’s not wrong that "\u{1F926}\u{1F3FC}\u200D\u2642\uFE0F".length == 7 (2019)
#8>We’ve seen four different lengths so far: Number of UTF-8 code units (17 in this case) Number of UTF-16 code units (7 in this case) Number of UTF-32 code units or Unicode scalar values (5 in this case) Number of extended grapheme clusters (1 in this case) We would not have this problem if we all agree to return number of bytes instead. Edit: My mistake. There would still be inconsistency between different encoding.…
"number of bytes" is dependent on the text encoding.
UTF-8 code units _are_ bytes, which is one of the things that makes UTF-8 very nice and why it has won
Re: It’s not wrong that "\u{1F926}\u{1F3FC}\u200D\u2642\uFE0F".length == 7 (2019)
#9>We’ve seen four different lengths so far: Number of UTF-8 code units (17 in this case) Number of UTF-16 code units (7 in this case) Number of UTF-32 code units or Unicode scalar values (5 in this case) Number of extended grapheme clusters (1 in this case) We would not have this problem if we all agree to return number of bytes instead. Edit: My mistake. There would still be inconsistency between different encoding.…
> We would not have this problem if we all agree to return number of bytes instead.
I don't understand. It depends on the encoding isn't it?
Re: It’s not wrong that "\u{1F926}\u{1F3FC}\u200D\u2642\uFE0F".length == 7 (2019)
#10>We’ve seen four different lengths so far: Number of UTF-8 code units (17 in this case) Number of UTF-16 code units (7 in this case) Number of UTF-32 code units or Unicode scalar values (5 in this case) Number of extended grapheme clusters (1 in this case) We would not have this problem if we all agree to return number of bytes instead. Edit: My mistake. There would still be inconsistency between different encoding.…
>Number of extended grapheme clusters (1 in this case)
Only if you are using a new enough version of unicode. If you were using an older version it is more than 1. As new unicode updates come out, the number of grapheme clusters a string has can change.