[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Case mapping of sharp s
From: |
Stephen J. Turnbull |
Subject: |
Re: Case mapping of sharp s |
Date: |
Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:41:00 +0900 |
David Kastrup writes:
> > But maybe we're doing something silly somewhere.
>
> The Emacs 22 multibyte scheme likely had worse properties for reverse
> searching. So maybe something might be simplified nowadays.
Nope. The basic nature of the representation and even algorithms are
the same. The main difference is that the leading-byte to character
length map in Mule coding is somewhat arbitrary, while in UTF-8
there's an algorithm for computing it. In both cases, the sane
algorithm is to keep a 256-entry table of corresponding lengths and
use the octet as an index into that table.
Re: Case mapping of sharp s, grischka, 2009/11/19
Re: Case mapping of sharp s,
Stephen J. Turnbull <=
Re: Case mapping of sharp s, Stefan Monnier, 2009/11/19
Re: Case mapping of sharp s, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/11/20
Re: Case mapping of sharp s, Richard Stallman, 2009/11/20
Re: Case mapping of sharp s, David Kastrup, 2009/11/21
Re: Case mapping of sharp s, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/11/21
Re: Case mapping of sharp s, Eli Zaretskii, 2009/11/21
Re: Case mapping of sharp s, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/11/21
Re: Case mapping of sharp s, Eli Zaretskii, 2009/11/21
Re: Case mapping of sharp s, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/11/22
Re: Case mapping of sharp s, Kenichi Handa, 2009/11/22