Does Java 1.5 support Unicode math alphanumerics as variable names?

Title: Does Java 1.5 support Unicode math alphanumerics as variable names? E.g., math italic i (U+1D456)? With such usage, Java mathematical programs could look more like the original math. Thanks Murray

Re: Three new Technical Notes posted - Ada UTF-16

D. Starner wrote: #12 UTF-16 for Processing This is incorrect in saying that Ada uses UTF-16. It supports UCS-2 only. The text of the standard says: The predefined type Wide_Character is a character type whose values correspond to the 65536 code positions of the ISO 10646 Basic Multilingual Plane

Re: Three new Technical Notes posted

> #12 UTF-16 for Processing > by Markus Scherer This is incorrect in saying that Ada uses UTF-16. It supports UCS-2 only. The text of the standard says: The predefined type Wide_Character is a character type whose values correspond to the 65536 code positions of the ISO 10646 Basic Multi

Three new Technical Notes posted

Three new Unicode Technical Notes are now available on the Unicode website. The main Tech Notes page is here: http://www.unicode.org/notes/ The new notes are: #11 Representing Myanmar in Unicode: Details and Examples by Martin Hosken & Maung Tuntunlwin #12 UTF-16 for Process

Re: Unicode forms for internal storage - BOCU-1 speed

Doug Ewell wrote: Markus Scherer wrote: "claim"? That hurts... I did measure these things, and the numbers in the table are all from my measurements. I also included the type of machine I used, etc. (http://www.unicode.org/notes/tn6/#Performance) Certainly I would never accuse Markus of falsifyin

Re: [OT] UTF-81920 was RE: Unicode forms for internal storage - BOCU-1 speed

Quoting Philippe Verdy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > From: "Jon Hanna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Quoting Marco Cimarosti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > Jon Hanna wrote: > > > > I refuse to rename my UTF-81920! > > > > > > Doug, Shlomi, there's a new one out there! > > > Jon, would you mind describing it? >

Re: [OT] UTF-81920 was RE: Unicode forms for internal storage - BOCU-1 speed

From: "Jon Hanna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Quoting Marco Cimarosti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Jon Hanna wrote: > > > I refuse to rename my UTF-81920! > > > > Doug, Shlomi, there's a new one out there! > > Jon, would you mind describing it? > > There are two different UTF-81920s (the resultant ambiguit

[OT] UTF-81920 was RE: Unicode forms for internal storage - BOCU-1 speed

Quoting Marco Cimarosti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Jon Hanna wrote: > > I refuse to rename my UTF-81920! > > Doug, Shlomi, there's a new one out there! > > Jon, would you mind describing it? There are two different UTF-81920s (the resultant ambiguity is very much in the spirit of UTF-81920). The f

RE: Unicode forms for internal storage - BOCU-1 speed

Jon Hanna wrote: > I refuse to rename my UTF-81920! Doug, Shlomi, there's a new one out there! Jon, would you mind describing it? _ Marco

Re: Unicode forms for internal storage - BOCU-1 speed

> By the way, I don't think that there's an official reference that attributes > the acronym "UTF-9" to any of these encoding forms. I think that if "UTF-9" > is used it should be agreed by Unicode as being an official unique > representation. I refuse to rename my UTF-81920! -- Jon Hanna

Re: Unicode forms for internal storage - BOCU-1 speed

Markus Scherer wrote: >> BOCU-1 might solve this problem, but multiplying and dividing by 243 >> doesn't sound faster than UTF-8 bit-shifting. (I'm still amazed by >> the claim in UTN #6 that converting Hindi text between UTF-16 and >> BOCU-1 took only 45% as long as converting it between UTF-16

Re: Unicode forms for internal storage - BOCU-1 speed

Kenneth Whistler wrote: >> I have seen several other informal proposals for "UTF-*" forms/ >> schemes. All this is just confusive, and their authors should imagine >> their own names for reference. What do you think of this idea? > > It is, indeed, "confusive". Some of us have deliberately contri