On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 12:14:52AM +0200, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
Don???t like that part much, either.
could you explain to me why UTF-8 is used for an apostrophe in the above
word Don't ?
--
Aaron J. Grier | Not your ordinary poofy goof. | agr...@poofygoof.com
silly brewer, saaz
Peter da Silva pe...@taronga.com wrote:
It's not the OS, it's the window system and applications.
Ok, there's varying definitions of OS. I was including the window
system, not meaning just the kernel.
So Gnome apps work well with Gnome apps, and KDE apps work well with KDE
apps
Gnome and
On Tue, 2005-10-18 at 14:11, Peter da Silva wrote:
[absinthe:~] peter% touch 久石譲 каталог
[absinthe:~] peter% file 久石譲 каталог
久石譲 каталог: empty
I was just shocked by bash running in gnome-terminal - creating a file
with the the above name it actually tab completed the name correctly ...
On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 00:14 +0200, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
* Jonathan Stowe gellyf...@gellyfish.com [2005-10-17 00:05]:
Well except there isn't a « or » on any keyboard I have seen
recently, are we reinventing APL here ?
You can use ASCII transliterations of all operators, like
for «». But in
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Juerd wrote:
¥ (Y)
« ()
» ()
*stuttering shock*
Those actually show up correctly in my rxvt on OS X...
Not that that will get me using perl 6, either.
--
The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds,
and the pessimist fears that
On Sun, Oct 16, 2005 at 10:46:17PM -0500, Luke Kanies wrote:
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Juerd wrote:
¥ (Y)
« ()
» ()
*stuttering shock*
Those actually show up correctly in my rxvt on OS X...
Given that large swathes of people are able to deal with character sets
more
* Peter da Silva pe...@taronga.com [2005-10-17 18:35]:
On Oct 17, 2005, at 9:26 AM, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
Prior to Unicode it was quite customary to do what they did,
too.
Only for idiots. There's not enough room in 8-bits to fit all
the special characters they need, so they end up doing
* Luke Kanies l...@madstop.com [2005-10-17 08:05]:
What I don't understand is what stinking moron decided that
other character sets would use a different coding for the
apostrophe character.
This is a straight apostrophe: '
This is a curly apostrophe: ’
I get this in Aristotle's emails
On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 03:56:40PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 03:36:16PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
Variable width character sets are themselves hateful. I'll go further
and say that they are a spectacularly stupid idea, and that whoever
decreed them needs
* Peter da Silva pe...@taronga.com [2005-10-17 20:15]:
Plus null bytes can then be part of the data, so most
charset-oblivious software breaks.
I thought breaking 8-bit-only software was a good thing.
I said charset-*oblivious*. A lot of software passes around
strings without ever
I said charset-*oblivious*. A lot of software passes around
strings without ever processing them. It would be pretty
pointless to force that sort of code to deal with encoding
issues; just make sure null termination continues to work and the
software will happily work with Unicode as well as
On Oct 17, 2005, at 6:46 AM, David Cantrell wrote:
And even if it did make UFS the default it would still suck, because it
doesn't support large filesystems. Want a 2TB fs? You've got no
choice
but to use HFS+.
OK, I'd assume that if they were to make UFS the default they'd start
by
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Juerd wrote:
I have this feeling -again- that you haven't seriously given recent
Linux distributions a serious try and chance.
Being a heavy user of both OS X and Linux (Debian), I can definitely say
that neither are without their hates. I wouldn't want to run an OS X
* Luke Kanies l...@madstop.com [2005-10-17 17:00]:
the day that I 'love' a package manager is the about 3 years
after I officially stopped maintaining my computers.
On this we can definitely agree.
Regards,
--
Aristotle Pagaltzis // http://plasmasturm.org/
* On 2005.10.13, in pine.osx.4.58.0510131748070.17...@tsetse.madstop.com,
* Luke Kanies l...@madstop.com wrote:
care the most about, which largely amount to having a minimalist
syntax without being so minimalist that it makes me feel like I'm
actually writing in binary (LISP),
On Fri, 14 Oct 2005, David Champion wrote:
http://www.dangermouse.net/esoteric/ook.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ook!
Ah.
So Ook. Ook? is the operator for can we please move on? Which isn't
meant for you specifically, Luke, it's just that you're the one who said
minimalist and gave me
At 17:32 -0500 2005.10.13, Peter da Silva wrote:
Please. That is not perl. It is a new language based on perl, called
perl6, where 6 is not a version number but part of the name.
That's nothing. The only thing in common betwen smail and smail3 was the
five shared letters in the name.
I have
When it comes to hating significant whitespace, nothing comes close to Perl6:
*boggle*
I'd say that the lunatics have taken over the asylum, except that
they were always in charge. However, they do seem to have gone
off their meds.
I rather take all Pythons significant whitespace rules (which
When it comes to hating significant whitespace, nothing comes close to Perl6:
sub square {my $x = shift; return $x * $x}
print square(1) * 2# Prints 2.
print square (1) * 2 # Prints 4.
Holy screaming sentient inkwells full of boiling blood and maggots.
I don't care much
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005, Abigail wrote:
When it comes to hating significant whitespace, nothing comes close to Perl6:
sub square {my $x = shift; return $x * $x}
print square(1) * 2# Prints 2.
print square (1) * 2 # Prints 4.
my %hash;# Empty hash.
Yes, a trailing comma determines whether 'print' adds a carriage return for
you.
It's BASIC!
Ooh, we're OO, except that we're functional, except, when we just make
shit up, except... at least we're not perl!
I hate all object oriented languages that don't even TRY to at least do as
good a
21 matches
Mail list logo
