Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<v38php$1gsj2$7@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Unicode in strings Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 02:50:33 -0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 22 Message-ID: <v38php$1gsj2$7@dont-email.me> References: <v0s17o$2okf4$2@dont-email.me> <v1eruj$3o1r8$1@dont-email.me> <v1h8l6$1ttd$1@gal.iecc.com> <v1kifk$17qh0$1@dont-email.me> <2024May10.182047@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <v1ns43$2260p$1@dont-email.me> <2024May11.173149@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <v1preb$2jn47$1@dont-email.me> <2024May12.110053@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <6124140226e28fd4afec0b435bdbeca1@www.novabbs.org> <88rk4j9irgh046o4hh8bl0pkotn4dabg0f@4ax.com> <2024May20.134620@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <v31dh8$3u8om$2@dont-email.me> <2024May29.100750@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 04:50:34 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="26c065b9f57d6a6f7be8cfe25ea33754"; logging-data="1602146"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+5sWQLXr3+dWPUnkzf/62x" User-Agent: Pan/0.158 (Avdiivka; ) Cancel-Lock: sha1:yVf6pTNI2YD4NJTNLY4LCu4L8DE= Bytes: 2376 On Wed, 29 May 2024 08:07:50 GMT, Anton Ertl wrote: > Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes: > >>On Mon, 20 May 2024 11:46:20 GMT, Anton Ertl wrote: >> >>> Algol 60 does not standardize a program representation in characters >>> (a grave mistake fixed by most later programming languages ... >> >>That would likely not have been considered feasible in 1960, given the >>wide variation in character sets between computer systems. > > COBOL did it. LISP did it. And so did Fortran. They all did it by severely curtailing their allowed character sets. > It's just that the Algol 60 committee did not want to go there. They wanted symbols like “÷”, “×”, “↑”, “≤”, “≥”, “≠”, “≡”, “⊃”, “∨”, “∧”, “¬” ... you get the idea. I don’t any computer system on earth could provide all those symbols at the time, or even, say, 20 years later.