On Sun, 2004-04-25 at 16:34, Dan Sugalski wrote:Just a heads up, there are two things that have been pointed out.
First, the transset op is transcharset. The abbreviation was a bit sloppy.
Second, in spots where "character" is used, substitute "grapheme", as I'm going to. Noting, of course, that a grapheme is *not* a glyph. Glyphs are display things that we're staying very very (very!) far away from. The change'll go into the op names--getglyph instead of getcharacter and suchlike things.
Hopefully using a different word'll help people remember that glyph!=codepoint, though we'll see how well that one works.
I don't understand. Substitute grapheme for character, as you're staying away from glyphs, but "getglyph" for "getcharacter"?
Gah. And that sound is the sound of me banging my head agains the wall because I'm an idiot. It's grapheme, everywhere.
And what about codepoints that *are* glyphs and/but aren't graphemes?
Where do we have those? (I'm getting tempted instead to just call them fred--it'll at least avoid some of this confusion...)
--
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
