3 ms·
It does appear to be some encoding issue relating to the Unicode "→" (U+2192). Encoded with UTF-8, this is represented by the three bytes 0xE2 0x86 0x92. In the
by geographomics 11y ago
It does appear to be some encoding issue relating to the Unicode "→" (U+2192). Encoded with UTF-8, this is represented by the three bytes 0xE2 0x86 0x92. In the TeX EC encoding, these correspond to "âĘŠ".
(See https://www.tug.org/TUGboat/Articles/tb11-4/tb30ferguson.pdf https://www.tug.org/TUGboat/Articles/tb11-4/tb30ferguson.pdf, also section 2.3 of http://mirrors.ctan.org/macros/latex/doc/encguide.pdf http://mirrors.ctan.org/macros/latex/doc/encguide.pdf)
- dvh_umd 11y agoI've submitted a replacement to arxiv that fixes the encoding issues (arxiv unfortunately does not support xelatex, which I use extensively). That will appear Tue 0:00 GMT. In the meantime, I've made a version available at https://www.cs.umd.edu/~dvanhorn/jfp-draft-2016.pdf https://www.cs.umd.edu/~dvanhorn/jfp-draft-2016.pdf