Re: unicode char ranges

[Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@...>]

2012/12/4 Marc Balmer <marc@msys.ch>:

> this is bogus and wrong on so many levels.

> there are 109'242 digital glyphs (codepoints) defined and
> what you offer here is just a poor and limited subset.
> totally useless.

Bogus, wrong, poor, limited, useless.

Nobody needs more than a poor and limited subset. The actual
subset varies according to context, granted.

Bogus, wrong, poor, limited, useless.

It should be quite obvious to a competent Lua programmer
how to adapt the basic methodology to the needs of his/her
particular situation.

Bogus, wrong, poor, limited, useless.

I work with text that was originally composed in ISO8859-1 or Windows
1252 and brutally translated by iconv.  My original
comment said "this is what I do".  I find it useful for, as I said,
"key generation, indexing, alphabetic sorting etc ".

> Actually you deserve a U+1F44A for this ;)

In the font used by my e-mail reader, which by the way has
no problems in displaying Chinese, Korean and Arabic,
I just get a rectangle containing the six digits, so I cannot
grasp the doubtless brilliant import of the remark.

Bogus, wrong, poor, limited, useless.