David L Nicol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Russ Allbery wrote: >> a caseless character wouldn't show up in either IsLower or IsUpper. > maybe an IsCaseless is warrented -- or Is[Upper|Lower] could return > UNKNOWN instead of TRUE|FALSE, if the extended boolean attributes allow > transbinary truth values. Well, UNKNOWN isn't accurate either; the case *is* known. It's just neither upper nor lowercase. (I wonder what it should return for titlecase characters too, for that matter.) -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
- Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism? Russ Allbery
- RE: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism? NeonEdge
- Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism? Simon Cozens
- RE: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism? NeonEdge
- Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criti... Simon Cozens
- Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish c... Simon Cozens
- Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism? Dan Sugalski
- Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism? David L. Nicol
- RE: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism? Russ Allbery
- RE: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism? Garrett Goebel
- Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism? Nick Ing-Simmons
- RE: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism? Nick Ing-Simmons
- Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism? Buddha Buck
- Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism? Dan Sugalski
- RE: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism? Dan Sugalski
- Re: Should we care much about this Unicode-ish criticism? Nicholas Clark