It is not "some sensible \u sequences" alone. First off, there's little agreement on what constitutes 'sensible'. Just the headache of the U300 diacritics adds to XBD6 significantly, if they're to be supported, as one example. The 'sensible' present solution is to not support them at all; others will argue the 'sensible' thing is to support them because Unocode does include these code points. The headache stems from it is not simply arbitrarily saying let's have the utility support these in $'', it's ensuring there are interfaces for the utilities to be written in that understand left-associative combining sequences, and these interfaces are portable because requirements in XBD add that support. On Thursday, July 30, 2020 Steffen Nurpmeso <stef...@sdaoden.eu> wrote: shwaresyst wrote in <1127836834.9524758.1596121054...@mail.yahoo.com>: |Yes, the additions necessary still for even limited Unicode support \ |above the broken bandaids C11+ provide are one of those issues. Where \ |Unicode is incompatible with POSIX, and is therefore (by design) broken \ |too needs addressing also. The white papers detailing most of these \ |changes have yet to be written, or published if some have been.
Hmm, the ISO C reference is of course true. But then this is about Unix/POSIX shells, and then adding some sensible \u sequences and defining their conversion to locale charset can only be an improvement, i think. --steffen | |Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear, |der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one |einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off |(By Robert Gernhardt)
