On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 1:29 AM, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, August 01, 2012 22:47:47 Philippe Sigaud wrote: >> I somehow thought that with UTF-8 you were limited to a part of >> Unicode, and to another, bigger part with UTF-16. >> I equated Unicode with UTF-32. >> This is what completely warped my vision. It's good to learn something >> new everyday, I guess. > > I guess that that would explain why you didn't understand what I was saying. I > was highly confused as to what was confusing about what I was saying, but it > didn't even occur to me that you had that sort of misunderstanding. You really > should get a better grip on unicode if you want to be writing code that lexes > or parses it efficiently (though it sounds like you're reading up on a lot > already right now).
I knew about 1-2-4 bytes schemes and such. But, somehow, for me, string == only-almost-ASCII characters. Anyway, it all *clicked* into place right afterwards and your answers are perfectly clear to me now.
