Date: Mon, 19 Jan 1998 19:37:06 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: daniel_sobral@voga.com.br Cc: louie@TransSys.COM, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Wide characters on tcp connections Message-ID: <199801191937.MAA05333@usr08.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <83256591.0040AFF0.00@papagaio.voga.com.br> from "daniel_sobral@voga.com.br" at Jan 19, 98 08:50:36 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > This is similar to asking if the UNIX filesystem has provisions > > for storing "wide characters in files"; the FS doesn't care > > what's inside it's files. > > Though that's technically right, one might feel the need for a standard if > the files he writes are going to be read by other people's programs. Of > course TCP, by itself, provides all support you need to send the > characters, but ignoring the practical problems would be akin to keeping to > IP (vs TCP or UDP) because that's all you _really_ need... The issue is one of stream synchronization. This is my main problem with UTF over non-error-checked links. If you have an implicit value boundry, then you are guaranteed a synchronized stream. Re: the FS example: a better example is to perhaps ask if a UNIX FS has provisions for storing "wide characters" (or preferrably, 16bit wchar_t values from ISO10646 aka Unicode) in *directory entries* (the current answer is "no, namei is too stupid"). Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199801191937.MAA05333>