C++ Logo

SG16

Advanced search

Subject: Re: Yet another approach to consensus for P2314
From: Peter Brett (pbrett_at_[hidden])
Date: 2021-03-17 12:41:28


I’d be comfortable with this approach.

              Peter

From: SG16 <sg16-bounces_at_[hidden]> On Behalf Of Corentin via SG16
Sent: 17 March 2021 17:20
To: SG16 <sg16_at_[hidden]>
Cc: Corentin <corentin.jabot_at_[hidden]>
Subject: [SG16] Yet another approach to consensus for P2314

EXTERNAL MAIL
Hello,
I'd like to know how people would feel about adoption P231 with the following modifications

- In paragraph 1, change "Physical source file characters are mapped, in an implementation-defined manner, to the translation character set" to
"Physical source file characters are mapped, in an implementation-defined manner, to elements of the universal character set (excluding surrogates) [Note: Not all elements of the Universal character set are assigned to abstract characters]".

- In 5.3 remove the definition of translation character set
- Change
A universal-character-name designates the abstract character in the translation character set whose UCS scalar value is the hexadecimal number represented by the sequence of hexadecimal-digits in the universal-character-name
to
A universal-character-name designates the element in the Universal character set whose UCS scalar value is the hexadecimal number represented by the sequence of hexadecimal-digits in the universal-character-name

- In the rest of the document, replace translation character set by Universal character set

- Postpone replacement of other misuses of the term "character" to future papers

I think it represents a reasonable consensus and I'd like to know if people who opposed the scalar value direction would feel the same.


Thanks,

Corentin


PS: As ever this is a terminology discussion with no behavior impact





SG16 list run by sg16-owner@lists.isocpp.org