Re: utf-8 vs. utf-32

From: Andrew Dunbar (hippietrail@yahoo.com)
Date: Tue Apr 23 2002 - 12:18:30 EDT

  • Next message: Paul Rohr: "ligature selections (was Re: undo and combining characters)"

     --- Karl Ove Hufthammer <huftis@bigfoot.com> wrote: >
    "Tomas Frydrych" <tomas@frydrych.uklinux.net> wrote
    > in
    > news:3CC57D83.21504.97D3F4@localhost:
    >
    > > utf-8 requires more processing time for all
    > people,
    >
    > And there is (AFAIK) *no* advantage to use UTF-8
    > over UTF-16.

    UTF-8 is easier to get right for the characters that
    fall into the area that would require surrogates in
    UTF-16.

    > > utf-32 more memory for most people.
    >
    > For *all* people. Almost all characters fit in
    > UTF-16 without
    > using surrogates, and certainly all the most
    > commonly characters
    > do. Surrogates will be very rare.

    Most Chinese documents will have a couple since many
    common Chinese names require characters that are very
    uncommon outside of family names.

    Andrew Dunbar.

    > --
    > Karl Ove Hufthammer

    =====
    http://linguaphile.sourceforge.net http://www.abisource.com

    __________________________________________________
    Do You Yahoo!?
    Everything you'll ever need on one web page
    from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
    http://uk.my.yahoo.com

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Apr 23 2002 - 12:19:45 EDT