From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.237.53.167 with SMTP id c36mr26446670qte.31.1499189402933; Tue, 04 Jul 2017 10:30:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.36.19.1 with SMTP id 1mr1301286itz.4.1499189402885; Tue, 04 Jul 2017 10:30:02 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!v31no2346642qtb.0!news-out.google.com!k7ni8467itk.0!nntp.google.com!v202no1082516itb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2017 10:30:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=76.113.92.25; posting-account=lJ3JNwoAAAAQfH3VV9vttJLkThaxtTfC NNTP-Posting-Host: 76.113.92.25 References: User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: GNAT vs UTF-8 source file names From: Shark8 Injection-Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2017 17:30:02 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:47277 Date: 2017-07-04T10:30:02-07:00 List-Id: On Tuesday, July 4, 2017 at 7:57:06 AM UTC-6, Simon Wright wrote: >=20 > It's worse than that, on macOS anyway[2]. >=20 > $ GNAT_FILE_NAME_CASE_SENSITIVE=3D1 gnatmake -c p*.ads > gcc -c p=C3=A1ck3.ads > p=C3=A1ck3.ads:1:10: warning: file name does not match unit name, should = be "p=C3=A1ck3.ads" >=20 > The reason for this apparently-bizarre message is[3] that macOS takes=20 > the composed form (lowercase a acute) and converts it under the hood=20 > to what HFS+ insists on, the fully decomposed form (lowercase a, combinin= g=20 > acute); thus the names are actually different even though they _look_=20 > the same. This is why I maintain that unicode is crap -- a mistake along the lines of= C that will likely take *decades* for the rest of "the industry" / compute= r science to realize. >=20 > I have to say that, great as it would be to have this fixed, the changes= =20 > required would be extensive, and I can=E2=80=99t see that anyone would th= ink it=20 > worth the trouble. One of unicode's biggest problems is that there's no longer any coherent vi= sion -- it started off as a idea to offer one code-point per character in h= uman language, but then shifted to glyph-building (hence combining characte= rs), and as such lacks a unifying principle.