3 ms·
For 99% of all development, Unicode is a non-issue. Perhaps you have to consider Right-To-Left support and that is about it. Even then good RTL support is mor
by spookthesunset 7y ago
For 99% of all development, Unicode is a non-issue. Perhaps you have to consider Right-To-Left support and that is about it. Even then good RTL support is more about page layout than the actual mechanics of displaying the text.
If you have a better idea to enable people around the world to use computers in any language that doesnt look something like Unicode, I’m sure everybody will adopt it.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y agoI get that I'm in a minority here, but I'm not even sure such a thing is necessary or a good idea. Generally speaking simple things are better than complex things, and from a computing perspective human written languages are ludicrously complicated. I'm not convinced that complicating all our software to support poop emoji is better than allowing human language to adapt to the medium in the manner it has done since language was first written down. > For 99% of all development, Unicode is a non-issue. Until it suddenly is an issue. Like, dealing with unpaired surrogates in Windows file paths. I mean, we're talking about an encoding where you need a rather large database and quite a bit of code just to tell how many characters are actually in a string.