* Re: 64 bit addressing and OOP [not found] ` <b3bc18$1jh31e$1@ID-139894.news.dfncis.de> @ 2003-02-23 22:08 ` Richard Riehle 2003-02-24 21:23 ` Randy Brukardt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Richard Riehle @ 2003-02-23 22:08 UTC (permalink / raw) Mark Thornton wrote: > Err, but Unicode already requires (I think) 21 bits which is the point of > this thread. Thanks, Mark. I am including this reply in comp.lang.ada So, will the next Ada standard include support for a 21 bit Unicode, or am I missing something and it already does? Richard Riehle ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: 64 bit addressing and OOP 2003-02-23 22:08 ` 64 bit addressing and OOP Richard Riehle @ 2003-02-24 21:23 ` Randy Brukardt 2003-02-26 22:53 ` Kent Paul Dolan 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Randy Brukardt @ 2003-02-24 21:23 UTC (permalink / raw) Richard Riehle wrote in message <3E594650.E09A986D@adaworks.com>... >Mark Thornton wrote: > >> Err, but Unicode already requires (I think) 21 bits which is the point of >> this thread. > >Thanks, Mark. > >I am including this reply in comp.lang.ada > >So, will the next Ada standard include support for a 21 bit Unicode, >or am I missing something and it already does? Probably. See AI-285. (http://www.ada-auth.org/ais.html). Randy Brukardt. ARG Editor ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: 64 bit addressing and OOP 2003-02-24 21:23 ` Randy Brukardt @ 2003-02-26 22:53 ` Kent Paul Dolan 2003-02-27 0:33 ` Hyman Rosen 2003-03-03 18:51 ` Robert I. Eachus 0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Kent Paul Dolan @ 2003-02-26 22:53 UTC (permalink / raw) "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> wrote: > Probably. See AI-285. (http://www.ada-auth.org/ais.html). ??? That link doesn't go to anything obviously pertinent, just the top of some huge and not pellucidly navigable database even whose component parts are confusingly labeled. Do you have a direct link or is what you reference really on that page somewhere? xanthian. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: 64 bit addressing and OOP 2003-02-26 22:53 ` Kent Paul Dolan @ 2003-02-27 0:33 ` Hyman Rosen 2003-02-27 6:56 ` Ada and 32 bit Unicode character sets (still?) " Kent Paul Dolan 2003-03-03 18:51 ` Robert I. Eachus 1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Hyman Rosen @ 2003-02-27 0:33 UTC (permalink / raw) Kent Paul Dolan wrote: > "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> wrote: >>Probably. See AI-285. (http://www.ada-auth.org/ais.html). > > ??? That link doesn't go to anything obviously pertinent, just the top > of some huge and not pellucidly navigable database even whose > component parts are confusingly labeled. > > Do you have a direct link or is what you reference really on that page > somewhere? This, maybe? It's AI-285, anyway. <http://www.ada-auth.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/AIs/AI-00285.TXT?rev=1.6> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Ada and 32 bit Unicode character sets (still?) 64 bit addressing and OOP 2003-02-27 0:33 ` Hyman Rosen @ 2003-02-27 6:56 ` Kent Paul Dolan 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Kent Paul Dolan @ 2003-02-27 6:56 UTC (permalink / raw) Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote: > Kent Paul Dolan wrote: >> "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> wrote: >>> Probably. See AI-285. (http://www.ada-auth.org/ais.html). >> ??? That link doesn't go to anything obviously pertinent, >> just the top of some huge and not pellucidly navigable >> database even whose component parts are confusingly >> labeled. >> Do you have a direct link or is what you reference really >> on that page somewhere? > This, maybe? It's AI-285, anyway. > <http://www.ada-auth.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/AIs/AI-00285.TXT?rev=1.6> Ah, thanks. You may well think me mad (many do) but I read the whole thing, comments and all. One can of worms remains hidden in what I read: if you allow the writing of source code in "native" character sets, you pretty much must as part of that grant the ability to use "native" quoting characters, and among the world's languages there are many of them. It would seem necessary to separate out of the "punctuation" classes those pieces of punctuation that are specifically quoting characters. This also adds the complexity that many national quoting characters have left and right handedness, while the existing Ada quoting characters are ambidexterous. Probably quoting syntax that includes demand for correct quote matches by handedness would best satisfy the "principle of least astonishment" for source code writers in those nations / languages / character set subsets. And as held by some but not all of the commenters, if you standardize these quoting characters for some, you should standardize them for all, or you end up with "Tower of Babel"-brand Ada. I can hardly wait to start using those dressy lower small double angle brackets to quote strings in source code; they look so _sophisticated_. I'd appreciate it if someone would pass this comment along to whomever is collecting comments for AI-285. Having made many lives miserable for a short while again, I'll try to refrain from further comments on the Ada specific issues I'm reading, after all, in comp.lang.java.advocacy. xanthian, whose standards committee (X3H3, X3H33) years included and enhanced being a nit-picking pedant. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: 64 bit addressing and OOP 2003-02-26 22:53 ` Kent Paul Dolan 2003-02-27 0:33 ` Hyman Rosen @ 2003-03-03 18:51 ` Robert I. Eachus 1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Robert I. Eachus @ 2003-03-03 18:51 UTC (permalink / raw) "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> wrote: >Probably. See AI-285. (http://www.ada-auth.org/ais.html). Kent Paul Dolan wrote: > ??? That link doesn't go to anything obviously pertinent, just the top > of some huge and not pellucidly navigable database even whose > component parts are confusingly labeled. > > Do you have a direct link or is what you reference really on that page > somewhere? http://www.ada-auth.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/AIs/AI-00285.TXT?rev=1.6 Randy does an excellent job maintaining that database, and may consider your complaint insulting. On the other hand, he may figure that anyone capable of reading the AIs finds navigating the database trivial. This draft of AI-285 is a good example. You need a working knowledge of several ISO standards and the ISO organization, and an expert's knowledge of the Ada standard to make much sense out of the discussion. To quote just the issue, not the proposed solution: SC22 directed its working groups to provide support for the ISO/IEC 10646 character set: "JTC 1/SC 22 believes that programming languages should offer the appropriate support for ISO/IEC 10646, and the Unicode character set where appropriate." Moreover, the working draft of ISO/IEC 10646:2003 makes use of planes other than the BMP. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-03-03 18:51 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- [not found] <b3601g$1j4sk7$1@ID-139894.news.dfncis.de> [not found] ` <memo.20030222112846.64077A@brangdon.madasafish.com> [not found] ` <b37off$1j0hm1$1@ID-139894.news.dfncis.de> [not found] ` <3E593457.CA43516E@adaworks.com> [not found] ` <b3bc18$1jh31e$1@ID-139894.news.dfncis.de> 2003-02-23 22:08 ` 64 bit addressing and OOP Richard Riehle 2003-02-24 21:23 ` Randy Brukardt 2003-02-26 22:53 ` Kent Paul Dolan 2003-02-27 0:33 ` Hyman Rosen 2003-02-27 6:56 ` Ada and 32 bit Unicode character sets (still?) " Kent Paul Dolan 2003-03-03 18:51 ` Robert I. Eachus
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox