This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] [BZ 17588 13064] Update UTF-8 charmap and width to Unicode 7.0.0
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>, Pravin Satpute <psatpute at redhat dot com>, Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh at redhat dot com>, Mike FABIAN <mfabian at redhat dot com>, <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Jens Petersen <petersen at redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 01:19:59 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] [BZ 17588 13064] Update UTF-8 charmap and width to Unicode 7.0.0
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <573624784 dot 8871393 dot 1416848051220 dot JavaMail dot zimbra at redhat dot com> <orzjb3o7yf dot fsf at free dot home> <s9dy4qir6fu dot fsf at ari dot site> <orfvce7y90 dot fsf at free dot home> <s9d388duu5r dot fsf at ari dot site> <orioh35mbq dot fsf at free dot home> <20141223111038 dot GA5172 at spoyarek dot pnq dot redhat dot com> <119234933 dot 5523688 dot 1422972847328 dot JavaMail dot zimbra at redhat dot com> <or7fvnlbeo dot fsf at livre dot home> <orwq3njuvc dot fsf at livre dot home> <54E23EC9 dot 5020400 at redhat dot com> <ortwyig5xa dot fsf at livre dot home>
There's also the matter of updating __STDC_ISO_10646__ in stdc-predef.h.
Unicode 7.0 claims to correspond to ISO/IEC 10646:2012 plus amendments 1
and 2 (and one extra character). Unfortunately I can find no sign of
amendment 2 ever having been published; it looks rather like it was
subsumed into ISO/IEC 10646:2014. Wikipedia claims that corresponds to
Unicode 7.0 (which would imply 201409L as version), but I can't find any
authoritative information, either on the Unicode website or after looking
through lots of SC2 documents, to confirm if there are indeed no
characters in 10646:2014 that aren't in Unicode 7.0.
Joseph S. Myers