4 ms·

FTA: > Runes correspond to code points in Go, which are between 1 and 4 bytes long. That's the dumbest thing I've read in this month. Why did they use the wro

by bmn__ 1y ago

FTA: > Runes correspond to code points in Go, which are between 1 and 4 bytes long. That's the dumbest thing I've read in this month. Why did they use the wrong word, sowing confusion¹, when any other programming language and the Unicode standard uses the correct expression "code point"? ¹ https://codepoints.net/runic https://codepoints.net/runic already exists

debugnik 1y ago
> uses the correct expression "code point" Actually no, these are Unicode scalars, not code points; they exclude the surrogate category. I agree that rune is a very poor name for it. It both mistakes what runes actually are and clashes with the runic block. But C# has adopted the Rune name for some reason. Rust simply calls these char, and OCaml uchar (unicode char), which are much better choices.
- debugnik 1y ago
  My bad, I just double-checked and Go did the dumb thing again: They are indeed representing full code points rather than scalars like everyone else.
  - bmn__ 1y ago
    Thank you for striving to be correct and taking the time for the investigation.
commandersaki 1y ago
Seeing as two of the authors designed utf8 (or at least concurrent to others), I think it’s safe to defer to their expertise and nomenclature here.
- bmn__ 1y ago
  http://enwp.org/Appeal_to_accomplishment http://enwp.org/Appeal_to_accomplishment Your use of the fallacy falls short of the reasoning standard expected here on HN. I did not downvote you, because I'd rather engage with words and effect change, but it does not surprise me that someone else did.