From: David Flanagan <david@...>
Date: 2007-10-29T16:59:17+09:00
Subject: Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept   implementation

Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> At Mon, 29 Oct 2007 14:11:45 +0900,
> David Flanagan wrote in [ruby-core:13032]:
>>>> In a related matter, Should String.inspect be modified to support \u 
>>>> escapes?  Perhaps when the primary encoding is not unicode it should do 
>>>> this?
>>> \x for other encodings?  It means rb_encoding has to know which
>>> escape to be used.
>>>
>> Hmm.  I assumed that it would be the inspect method that generated the 
>> escapes, not the encoding objects. But yes, I was being Unicode-centric, 
>> since that is the only encoding we're considering a special escape for...
> 
> Instead, how about to use \x for all encodings, with making
> \x{...} to represent codepoint?
> 

So if the string encoding is different from the primary encoding, and 
the string contains codepoints > 255, then inspect will dump those 
codepoints using \x{} escapes?

I'm okay with that.  I'd prefer, however, if the output of inspect was a 
  valid Ruby string literal suitable to pass to eval().

	David