[#4065] Surprise in Time#sec — Steven Jenkins <steven.jenkins@...>
This bit me:
[#4067] Segfault in Thread#initialize / caller — Florian Gro<florgro@...>
Moin!
[#4076] Ruby/DL — Jamis Buck <jamis_buck@...>
I recently used Ruby/DL to create bindings to the SQLite3 embedded
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 02:53:49AM +0900, Jamis Buck wrote:
>>>>> "P" == Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 03:05:48AM +0900, ts wrote:
>>>>> "P" == Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 01:10:34AM +0900, ts wrote:
>>>>> "P" == Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 06:57:57PM +0900, ts wrote:
>>>>> "P" == Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 12:06:16AM +0900, ts wrote:
>>>>> "P" == Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
ts wrote:
[#4116] Test::Unit::Collector::Dir won't work with code that modifies $LOAD_PATH — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
Any test code that depends upon modifications of $: fails when used
Hi,
On 11 Jan 2005, at 04:14, nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:
On 11 Jan 2005, at 09:39, Eric Hodel wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 04:06:10 +0900, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 23:48:58 -0500, Nathaniel Talbott
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 17:17:14 -0500, Nathaniel Talbott
[#4146] The face of Unicode support in the future — Charles O Nutter <headius@...>
Hello Rubyists!
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> writes:
Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 11:53:48PM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 02:13:35PM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
[#4189] Authenticated proxy support for open-uri — Neil Kohl <nakohl@...>
Hello!
[#4232] Carriage return on shebang — Florian Gro<florgro@...>
Moin.
[#4242] tracer.rb: Do not list pseudo source lines of binary extensions — Florian Gro<florgro@...>
Moin.
[#4243] Patch that enables https in open-uri.rb — Michael Neumann <mneumann@...>
Hi,
In article <41E93F42.9090705@ntecs.de>,
Tanaka Akira wrote:
[#4269] Re: The face of Unicode support in the future — Wes Nakamura <wknaka@...>
Hi,
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
[#4296] parse_c.rb: allow whitespace after function names — Tilman Sauerbeck <tilman@...>
Hi,
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> [2005-01-21 17:43]:
[#4311] RFE: Enumerable#group_by, Array#^ — Florian Gro<florgro@...>
Moin.
[#4323] test/unit doesn't rescue a Exception — Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org>
test/unit doesn't rescue a Exception in a test method, as follows.
In article <87is5jb46q.fsf@serein.a02.aist.go.jp>,
On 9/1/06, Tanaka Akira <akr@fsij.org> wrote:
On Sep 2, 2006, at 6:34 PM, Nathaniel Talbott wrote:
In article <A604C0B3-95ED-4B9B-866C-79A2C7D5E3C4@segment7.net>,
On Sep 2, 2006, at 9:39 PM, Tanaka Akira wrote:
In article <622DAC7E-55DB-4854-B82B-A037CE9C75EF@segment7.net>,
In article <87ac5hv4bo.fsf@fsij.org>,
On Sep 3, 2006, at 8:21 AM, Tanaka Akira wrote:
[#4332] IO#clearerr missing in action — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
I wanted to implement tail(1) in ruby cleanly, but found the best I
[#4335] When will Object#type disappear? — "David A. Black" <dblack@...>
Hi --
Re: The face of Unicode support in the future
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 23:12:14 +0900, Florian Gro<florgro@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
>> Besides, characters in _my_ encoding would not fit in the range
>> of 0..255 anyway.
> Depends on whether you're handling them as raw bytes or not. :)
>
> (But I think that the unused bit in the Symbol namespace could be
> used for representing full UCS2 range, but that would mean
> enforcing a specific encoding for those immediate one-character
> Strings. And I think you would need full UCS4 range anyway. I'm
> not sure.)
UTF-16 is better than UCS2 -- UTF-16 is UCS2 with surrogate
characters, and you don't really gain anything by using UCS4/UTF-32
(in fact, you lose quite a bit of Huffman encoding). Most Western
languages can be efficiently presented in UTF-8; most Eastern
languages are more efficiently presented in UTF-16. (I've done quite
a bit of research on this.)
Both UCS2 and UCS4 are deprecated encodings, and the only reason
that they're really in use at this point is because some filesystems
(NTFS) use UCS2 as their base encoding and cannot therefore support
UTF-16 encodings.
I do believe that there was discussion regarding having a ByteVector
sort of class, too -- resulting in the sort of speed optimisations
necessary without impacting normal String use.
-austin
--
Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com
* Alternate: austin@halostatue.ca