in the post this apostrophe: [‘] is used instead if the standard ['] apostrophe or [`] grave. It's pretty trivial to check just by opening it in any non-Unicode

in the post this apostrophe: [‘] is used instead if the standard ['] apostrophe or [`] grave. It's pretty trivial to check just by opening it in any non-Unicode supporting terminal. In fact the zero width characters show up explicitly as blue <200b> in vim. People always throw around language compatibility when the unusual features of Unicode are thrown around, but stuff like zero width characters really don't need to be supported for language compatibility. On another note, if Unicode is willing to butcher Chinese/Kanji orthography with Han unification then it ought to be willing to get rid of Latin homographs.