> From: Matt Birkholz
> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 14:52:48 -0700
>
> [...] if 0244 was not slashified, why was 0237? Smells like a bug.
Sorry, I was smelling something else. :-o What is it about the Send
key that makes the lightbulb go on over my head? :-}
0244 is an ISO-8859-1 (nee Latin-1, nee
> From:
> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 10:55:29 +0100
>
> Hello fellow Schemers!
>
> I've run into a curious problem. I'm working with UTF-8 files. Generally
> things work very well, however (on a UTF-8 terminal):
>
> 1 ]=> "ä"
>
> ;Value 13: "ä"
>
> 1 ]=> "ß"
>
> ;Value 14: "Ã\237"
Did you first
I forgot to mention this in the email just now:
> (wide-string->utf8-string (utf8-string->wide-string "ÄÖüäößſ"))
"�\204�\226üäö�\237ſ"
The problem *seems* to be that the second byte of each utf-8 sequence is
*not* actually output as the octal character \204, but instead the
characters "\204" (wh
Hello fellow Schemers!
I've run into a curious problem. I'm working with UTF-8 files. Generally
things work very well, however (on a UTF-8 terminal):
1 ]=> "ä"
;Value 13: "ä"
1 ]=> "ß"
;Value 14: "Ã\237"
1 ]=> "\303\244"
;Value 15: "ä"
1 ]=> "\303\237"
;Value 16: "Ã\237"
Why does ä (\303\
