What Every Software Developer Must Know About Unicode (2003)
joelonsoftware.com
What Every Software Developer Must Know About Unicode (2003)
1–10 of 39 posts
Re: What Every Software Developer Must Know About Unicode (2003)
#2A good summary, but for one imortant detail: In UTF-16, some code points (laying on the so-called "astral planes", ie not on the "basic multilingual plane") take 32 bits.
The Emoji, for example, lie on the first higher plane: 🍒🎄🐰🚴. Firefox and Safari display them properly, Chrome doesn't, no idea for IE and Opera.
UCS-2 is a strict 16-bit encoding (a subset of UTF-16), and it cannot represent all characters.
It is the encoding used by JavaScript, which can be problematic when double width characters are used. For example, `"🐙🐚🐛🐜🐝🐞🐟".length` is 14 even though there are only seven characters, and you could slice that string in the middle of a character.
Re: What Every Software Developer Must Know About Unicode (2003)
#3a new operating system needs new tools. It should invent new languages for the compiler. The source code should be Unicode, not ascii.
I would be miserable with Unicode. My editor has to move across characters (multibyte gets ugly). My strcpy and strcmp would need to be changed.
I would allow employees to convert TempleOS to Unicode, but I would want nothing to do with it, then. It's the right thing, but I simply want nothing to do with it, LOL.
God says... desert computers love be_quiet_bird I'll_get_right_on_it Vegas It_grieves_me I_got_your_back come_and_get_me grumble
Re: What Every Software Developer Must Know About Unicode (2003)
#4[deleted]
Re: What Every Software Developer Must Know About Unicode (2003)
#5A good summary, but for one imortant detail: In UTF-16, some code points (laying on the so-called "astral planes", ie not on the "basic multilingual plane") take 32 bits. The Emoji, for example, lie on the first higher plane: 🍒🎄🐰🚴. Firefox and Safari display them properly, Chrome doesn't, no idea for IE and Opera. UCS-2 is a strict 16-bit encoding (a subset of UTF-16), and it cannot represent all characters. It i…
It should be noted that at the time JavaScript was developed, there was only the basic multilingual plane - the extension was only introduced with Unicode 2.0 in 1996.
Re: What Every Software Developer Must Know About Unicode (2003)
#6A good summary, but for one imortant detail: In UTF-16, some code points (laying on the so-called "astral planes", ie not on the "basic multilingual plane") take 32 bits. The Emoji, for example, lie on the first higher plane: 🍒🎄🐰🚴. Firefox and Safari display them properly, Chrome doesn't, no idea for IE and Opera. UCS-2 is a strict 16-bit encoding (a subset of UTF-16), and it cannot represent all characters. It i…
I wonder how hard it'd be to get JavaScript/ECMAScript onto a better encoding.. Do we actually have a "better" encoding?
Re: What Every Software Developer Must Know About Unicode (2003)
#7A good summary, but for one imortant detail: In UTF-16, some code points (laying on the so-called "astral planes", ie not on the "basic multilingual plane") take 32 bits. The Emoji, for example, lie on the first higher plane: 🍒🎄🐰🚴. Firefox and Safari display them properly, Chrome doesn't, no idea for IE and Opera. UCS-2 is a strict 16-bit encoding (a subset of UTF-16), and it cannot represent all characters. It i…
From my undestanding, the Chrome doesn't display emoji because of poor unicode handling, but its a difference in the (font?) renderer used.
See http://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/41228/why-do-emoji-... and https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=90177
Re: What Every Software Developer Must Know About Unicode (2003)
#8A good summary, but for one imortant detail: In UTF-16, some code points (laying on the so-called "astral planes", ie not on the "basic multilingual plane") take 32 bits. The Emoji, for example, lie on the first higher plane: 🍒🎄🐰🚴. Firefox and Safari display them properly, Chrome doesn't, no idea for IE and Opera. UCS-2 is a strict 16-bit encoding (a subset of UTF-16), and it cannot represent all characters. It i…
I wonder how hard it'd be to get JavaScript/ECMAScript onto a better encoding.. Do we actually have a "better" encoding?
Depends what you mean by "better". UTF-8 generally ends up using fewer bytes to represent the same string than UTF-16, unless you're using certain characters a lot (e.g. for asian languages), so it's a candidate, but it's not like you could just flip a switch and make all javascript use UTF-8.
Re: What Every Software Developer Must Know About Unicode (2003)
#9A good summary, but for one imortant detail: In UTF-16, some code points (laying on the so-called "astral planes", ie not on the "basic multilingual plane") take 32 bits. The Emoji, for example, lie on the first higher plane: 🍒🎄🐰🚴. Firefox and Safari display them properly, Chrome doesn't, no idea for IE and Opera. UCS-2 is a strict 16-bit encoding (a subset of UTF-16), and it cannot represent all characters. It i…
This is a bit pedantic, but JS implementations don't necessarily use UCS-2 as the internal encoding. The issue is that the spec requires characters to be exposed to programs as 16-bit values. See here: http://mathiasbynens.be/notes/javascript-encoding
Re: What Every Software Developer Must Know About Unicode (2003)
#10A good summary, but for one imortant detail: In UTF-16, some code points (laying on the so-called "astral planes", ie not on the "basic multilingual plane") take 32 bits. The Emoji, for example, lie on the first higher plane: 🍒🎄🐰🚴. Firefox and Safari display them properly, Chrome doesn't, no idea for IE and Opera. UCS-2 is a strict 16-bit encoding (a subset of UTF-16), and it cannot represent all characters. It i…
Emojis are even more fun than that. Some of them take two unicode characters.