On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 07:13:15 -0700 (PDT), rajarshi das <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> Hi,
> The following unicode folding test fails on EBCDIC
> (perl-5.8.6) :
>
> $a = '0178';
> $b = '00FF';
>
> $a1 = pack("U0U*", hex $code);
> $b1 = pack("U0U*", map { hex } split " ", $mapping);
>
> if (":$b1:" =~ /:[$a1]:/i) {
> print "ok\n";
> }
I guess $code is $a and $mapping is $b...
> Alternately, if $a = '0178', and $b = '00DF', the test
> passes.
>
> Why is this so ?
> Is it because \xFF as a border case ( 1 less than 256)
> is not properly handled ?
0xDF in IBM 1047 or some other EBCDIC encodings
is ÿ (that is y with diaeresis) which corresponds U+00FF
and its uppercase is U+0178.
How about $a = '039C' and $b = '00A0' or '00B5'?
Here 0xA0 in IBM 1047 is µ (that is MICRO SIGN)
which corresponds U+00B5 and its uppercase is U+039C.
> Does someone have any thoughts on the source of the
> problem ?
Possibly a Unicode code value and a native code value may be confused.
If the native encoding is EBCDIC, it causes much trouble
compared with the case of ASCII/latin-1.
Or is the value stored in $b1 generated by pack("U0U*", map { hex }
split " ", '00FF') really a representation of U+00FF?
use Devel::Peek and what is output from Devel::Peek::Dump($b1)?
## example of usage of Devel::Peek ##
use Devel::Peek;
$b1 = pack("U0U*", map { hex } split " ", '00FF');
Dump($b1);
## example of output from Devel::Peek::Dump ##
SV = PV(0x36572c) at 0x182c96c
REFCNT = 1
FLAGS = (POK,pPOK,UTF8)
PV = 0x36d9b4 "\303\277"\0 [UTF8 "\x{ff}"]
CUR = 2
LEN = 4
where PV stands for string and "\303\277" is U+00FF in UTF-8.
In UTF-EBCDIC, the output should be different.
regards,
SADAHIRO Tomoyuki
