4 ms·
Sure, but most code doesn't interact with raw packets. Legacy, ascii-only internet standards probably make up much less than 1% of new lines of code written tod
by josephg 2mo ago
Sure, but most code doesn't interact with raw packets. Legacy, ascii-only internet standards probably make up much less than 1% of new lines of code written today. Programming languages should support this use case. But not at the expense of the other 99% of software.
Unicode-aware strings are the right choice for 99% of code. The last 1% should be a special case.
- tosti 2mo agoRaw packets? Legacy? Have you've ever talked to anything over a socket? You don't need a raw socket to get into trouble. You also don't need a "legacy" protocol.
- josephg 2mo agoYes, plenty of times. But I’m usually using raw byte arrays via protobuf or something similar. ASCII only text protocols are rare. Most devs don’t reimplement them from scratch. I’d wager most code is application code, where UTF8 strings are a great choice.