Re: Programming language specification languages

"Joachim Durchholz" <joachim_d@gmx.de>
6 Oct 2001 16:36:24 -0400

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[2 earlier articles]
Re: Programming language specification languages asloane@ics.mq.edu.au (Anthony M. Sloane) (2001-09-25)
Re: Programming language specification languages rkrayhawk@aol.com (2001-09-25)
Re: Programming language specification languages idbaxter@semdesigns.com (Ira D. Baxter) (2001-09-26)
Re: Programming language specification languages vbdis@aol.com (2001-09-26)
Re: Programming language specification languages wclodius@aol.com (2001-10-06)
Re: Programming language specification languages joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2001-10-06)
Re: Programming language specification languages joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2001-10-06)
Re: Programming language specification languages neelk@alum.mit.edu (2001-10-10)
I'm russian! was character sets crystal-pin@mail.ru (2001-10-13)
Re: I'm russian! was character sets spinoza1111@yahoo.com (2001-10-14)
Re: Programming language specification languages wclodius@aol.com (2001-10-20)
Re: I'm russian! was character sets tmaslen@wedgetail.com (Thomas Maslen) (2001-10-20)
Re: Programming language specification languages nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (2001-10-21)
[2 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |

From: "Joachim Durchholz" <joachim_d@gmx.de>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 6 Oct 2001 16:36:24 -0400
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 01-09-087 01-09-106
Keywords: design, i18n
Posted-Date: 06 Oct 2001 16:36:24 EDT

RKRayhawk <rkrayhawk@aol.com> wrote:
> It seems worth questioning whether professionals nowadays ought to
> be oriented to 8-bit foundations.


Well, this depends entirely on programming language. For a
programming language, I'm still strongly with 7-bit ASCII. This is
because I want my software to be portable: across locales (which means
I have to write in English, and I don't really need more than 7-bit
ASCII), and across operating systems (which means it should be
representable on the common EBCDIC code pages).


Besides, there are some uniqueness issues. For example, the letter "a"
is present both in Latin and Cyrillic alphabets, but the Cyrillic
variant has a code point that's different from the Latin one. I'm not
sure whether it's a real issue, and I'd like to hear any personal
experience from, say, Russian Java programmers. Anyway, I'm suspicious
about the issue; programming requires precision, and this uniqueness
issue is another source of imprecision.


Of course, scripting languages intended for the hand of the end user
*should* be able to support 16-bit characters (which, today, means
Unicode).


Regards,
Joachim


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.