> One thing I noticed is that the wording about Grapheme_Extend is gone. I
didn't know what this meant before, so I don't know now if this is a good
removal or a bad removal.

I don't recall any requests for removing it and think that it should be
reintroduced.

- Victor

On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 10:44 PM Jens Maurer <Jens.Maurer_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On 05/05/2022 04.08, Barry Revzin wrote:
> > I think I have applied this. Here's the rendered version:
> https://brevzin.github.io/cpp_proposals/2286_fmt_ranges/p2286r8.html#pnum_12
> <
> https://brevzin.github.io/cpp_proposals/2286_fmt_ranges/p2286r8.html#pnum_12
> >
>
> > How does this look?
>
> p2.2
>
> For each code sequence X in S that either encodes a single character or
> encoding state transition or that is a sequence of ill-formed code units is
> processed in order as follows:
>
> That feels like bad English grammar to me.
>
> Why "encoding", yet there is an "encodes" before that?
> Why "either" and there are three things that don't
> exactly correspond grammatically?
>
> Maybe make a bulleted sub-list with the three items
> so that the structure is clear.
>
> "If C is one of the UCS scalar values the table below,"
>
> add "in"
>
> better clarify: "the two characters shown as the
> corresponding escape sequence are appended to E"
>
>
> after p2.3.4, p2.5
>
> "simple-hexadecimal-digit-sequence"
>
> I would not re-use lexing grammar for a local placeholder,
> just say \u{/hex-digit-sequence/} or so.
>
>
> p2.5
>
> "Otherwise, X is a sequence of ill-formed code units. Each"
>
> -> "Otherwise (X is a sequence of ill-formed code units), each code unit
> ..."
>
>
> "U+0027 APOSTROPHE is escaped as \' while U+0022 QUOTATION MARK is left
> unchanged."
>
> Can we rephrase that to avoid "is escaped as"? We were on such a good
> track to just append characters and avoid any judgment calls.
>
> suggestion "
> - for each character U+0027 APOSTROPHE in S, the two characters \' are
> appended to E
> - U+0022 QUOTATION MARK is left unchanged"
>
>
> Jens
>