Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, Matti Aarnio wrote:
>
> > Something along the lines of: As we no longer have access control
> > in form of having magic UIDs, e.g. zero vs. non-zero, we could as well
> > begin to use UTF-16 UNICODE 3.0 encoded strings for UID referral in
> > fixed size arrays giving us instant Java string compability.
> > (Ok, far fetched, but just you wait...)
>
> To fsck with Java, there are reasons to represent text as text completely
> unrelated to that crap. Actually, flag-day might be a good idea - we
> definitely could live without _many_ system calls. And not just ones that
> have analogs with wider fields. Look through the syscall tables and see
> how much of it consists of useless junk that belongs to userland. Sigh...
>
UTF-16 is utter crap, anyway. UTF-8 or UCS-4/UTF-32 are the only sane
encodings of Unicode (one multibyte, one wide. UTF-16 combines the
advantages of neither and the disadvantages of both.)
-hpa
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> at work, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
