More WTFery from SorryIAsked.com (i.e. StackOverflow)
-
@bgodot said:
The best part about Unicode character casing is that it's Locale dependant.
For example in a Turkish locale, uppercase i is İ and lowercase I is ı.
Isn't that what it should do? Look, I gave you folks two choices when we started this whole shindig, sorted in order of my preference:
@Morbius' List of Options For Dealing With Foreign Languages (circa 1985) said:
- Use our mighty nuclear weapons to kill everyone who doesn't speak English.
- Develop a complex system of character encoding to support the lesser tongues. Even a well-designed system will be complicated and--at times--infuriating, as their tongues are as varied and plentiful as the lice that cover their filthy bodies.
You all voted for #2, against my warnings. And for the record, I still support #1, but I fear it is too late seeing as so many of our precious, precious nuclear weapons have had their physics packages fondled and dissected into non-existence by the smelly peaceniks.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
Look, I gave you folks two choices when we started this whole shindig
No you didn't. Your very first post in this thread says:@morbiuswilters said:What the hell is wrong with Unicode? I'll admit it has some stupidity: the pile of poo and snowman come to mind, as well as the "decomposed" representations of glyphs which have to be normalized, but all-in-all it's not awful.
The correct options are:- Use English and plain ASCII
- Fuck Off And Die
-
@El_Heffe said:
@morbiuswilters said:
Look, I gave you folks two choices when we started this whole shindig
No you didn't. Your very first post in this thread says:@morbiuswilters said:What the hell is wrong with Unicode? I'll
admit it has some stupidity: the pile of poo and snowman come to mind,
as well as the "decomposed" representations of glyphs which have to be
normalized, but all-in-all it's not awful.Non-contradictory! See, I offered you the option of killing 'em all and letting Jehovah sort 'em out 27 years ago, but you people chose Unicode instead. My first comment in the thread was my current take on the situation which is: the implementation of Unicode has some rough edges, but all-in-all it is technically sound. However the theory behind Unicode--namely, letting non-English-speakers cling to their pathetic lives--is still as flawed as it was in 1985.
