Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 18:50:54 +0200
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 at 18:30, Hubert Tong <hubert.reinterpretcast_at_[hidden]>
wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 9:16 AM Jens Maurer via SG16 <
> sg16_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> On 20/06/2020 13.54, Corentin Jabot wrote:
>>
>> > * Should the standard mandates that byte value are preserved? ( I
>> think this would put severe constraints on implementations )
>>
>> My view: allowed, but not required. But we should acknowledge that
>> state of affairs by allowing characters beyond Unicode in the source
>> character set. (In particular, nobody should be forced to map
>> non-Unicode chars to the Unicode private use area.)
>>
> +1
>
I strongly agreed that an implementations should never put things in the
PUA (unless of course they were there before phase 1)
I again disagree that "characters beyond Unicode" is a thing compilers
should care about
wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 9:16 AM Jens Maurer via SG16 <
> sg16_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> On 20/06/2020 13.54, Corentin Jabot wrote:
>>
>> > * Should the standard mandates that byte value are preserved? ( I
>> think this would put severe constraints on implementations )
>>
>> My view: allowed, but not required. But we should acknowledge that
>> state of affairs by allowing characters beyond Unicode in the source
>> character set. (In particular, nobody should be forced to map
>> non-Unicode chars to the Unicode private use area.)
>>
> +1
>
I strongly agreed that an implementations should never put things in the
PUA (unless of course they were there before phase 1)
I again disagree that "characters beyond Unicode" is a thing compilers
should care about
Received on 2020-06-20 11:54:15