Re: Suppressing UTFException / Squashing Bad Codepoints?

2013-12-23 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On Tuesday, December 24, 2013 02:06:22 Brad Anderson wrote: > On Monday, 23 December 2013 at 22:41:47 UTC, John Carter wrote: > > Eww. > > > > If I read the source correctly it mallocs a new array and runs > > down the > > original at least three times! (Four if you count peeks) > > > > Not to me

Re: Suppressing UTFException / Squashing Bad Codepoints?

2013-12-23 Thread Brad Anderson
On Monday, 23 December 2013 at 22:41:47 UTC, John Carter wrote: Eww. If I read the source correctly it mallocs a new array and runs down the original at least three times! (Four if you count peeks) Not to mention that it is completely unintegrated with stdio. Sigh! I miss the Good Old Days o

Re: Suppressing UTFException / Squashing Bad Codepoints?

2013-12-23 Thread John Carter
Eww. If I read the source correctly it mallocs a new array and runs down the original at least three times! (Four if you count peeks) Not to mention that it is completely unintegrated with stdio. Sigh! I miss the Good Old Days of 7-bit ASCII! ;-) On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Brad Anderson

Suppressing UTFException / Squashing Bad Codepoints?

2013-12-23 Thread John Carter
This frustrated me in Ruby unicode too Typically i/o is the ultimate in "untrusted and untrustworthy" sources, coming usually from systems beyond my control. Likely to be corrupted, or maliciously crafted, or defective... Unfortunately not all sequences of bytes are valid UTF8. Thus inevita

Re: Suppressing UTFException / Squashing Bad Codepoints?

2013-12-23 Thread Brad Anderson
On Monday, 23 December 2013 at 20:48:08 UTC, John Carter wrote: This frustrated me in Ruby unicode too Typically i/o is the ultimate in "untrusted and untrustworthy" sources, coming usually from systems beyond my control. Likely to be corrupted, or maliciously crafted, or defective... Un