Anonymous user
Talk:Reverse a string: Difference between revisions
unicode ok, composed hm
(unicode ok, composed hm) |
|||
Line 15:
:: i realised that their could be further complications, but stopped at something that could handle unicode of the type given, i.e. simple chars with optional simple composable chars.
::: To me, it is a reasonable assumption. In fact I've not used the example given in the task, which is a real special one beyond common usage; handling Unicode like single characters (UTF-8 encoded or whatever) should not imply handling everything. I bet a lot of examples which handle just single byte encoding won't work if the single byte encoding used would have special character like those (i.e. which should be considered tied to the next character): they require a special handling... just with reversing and few more cases. I would change the example string just to stress the ability to handle multibyte encodings, rather than special composed characters in whichever single byte or multibyte encodings --[[User:ShinTakezou|ShinTakezou]] 22:38, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
| |||