This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Should glibc provide a builtin C.UTF-8 locale?

From: Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org>
To: Rich Felker <dalias at libc dot org>
Cc: Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 12:01:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Should glibc provide a builtin C.UTF-8 locale?
Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
References: <54DB8243 dot 3050903 at redhat dot com> <20151021174936 dot GA26317 at vapier dot lan> <20151022151322 dot GW8645 at brightrain dot aerifal dot cx>

On 22 Oct 2015 11:13, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 01:49:36PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > i've created a C.UTF-8 page where i've tried to gather all the points
> > people made in this thread:
> > 	https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Proposals/C.UTF-8
> 
> On the wiki I see, under differences from C:
> 
> - LC_COLLATE: Sort using the Unicode codepoint 
> 
> But this does not seem to be a difference. Unicode codepoint order is
> identical to UTF-8 code unit order as unsigned char, i.e. the same as
> the C locale.

i was thinking of overlong encodings, but i guess those are technically
invalid according to the spec.  i think it's still worth calling out in
the doc, but we can include an aside that highlights things.
-mike

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Should glibc provide a builtin C.UTF-8 locale?
  - From: Rich Felker

References:
- Re: Should glibc provide a builtin C.UTF-8 locale?
  - From: Mike Frysinger
- Re: Should glibc provide a builtin C.UTF-8 locale?
  - From: Rich Felker

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]