Appears to be mostly good information, though I'm surprised he paints UTF-16 in such a positive light ("optimized for languages residing in the 2 byte character

Appears to be mostly good information, though I'm surprised he paints UTF-16 in such a positive light ("optimized for languages residing in the 2 byte character range."). UTF-16 should be considered harmful: http://benlynn.blogspot.com/2011/02/utf-8-good-utf-16-bad.html http://benlynn.blogspot.com/2011/02/utf-8-good-utf-16-bad.ht... http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1049947/should-utf-16-be-considered-harmful/1855375#1855375 http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1049947/should-utf-16-be-...