Cult-like behaviour [was Re: Kindness]
rosuav at gmail.com
Mon Jul 16 17:00:40 EDT 2018
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 6:36 AM, Marko Rauhamaa <marko at pacujo.net> wrote:
> Chris Angelico <rosuav at gmail.com>:
>> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 5:40 AM, Marko Rauhamaa <marko at pacujo.net> wrote:
>>> You mean each code point is one code point wide. But that's rather an
>>> irrelevant thing to state. The main point is that UTF-32 (aka
>>> Unicode) uses one or more code points to represent what people would
>>> consider an individual character.
>> No, each code point is one code unit wide. It's not irrelevant.
> Finally, we have reached the simple crux of the debate, and that's where
> you and I disagree.
> Unicode code points sure express many more things than UTF-8 bytes.
> UTF-8 bytes can only represent the first 128 code points of Unicode.
> However, even Unicode has given up trying to represent even basic
> everyday symbols with single codepoints, which leads back to the
> question of how Python3's Unicode strings are superior to Python2's
> UTF-8 strings. They have the same up and downsides.
You snipped my explanation of how what you just said is flat out false.
More information about the Python-list