On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 10:11 PM, Branko Čibej <brane_at_apache.org> wrote:
> > Stating that equivalent-case are treated as equal states that the
> > code points "A"-"Z" are all treated as equal, and "a"-"z" are all
> > treated as equal (and "A" and "a" would be treated as unique
> > of one another) LOL
> I guess we're using different meanings of the term 'equivalence group.'
> Doesn't really matter as long as the behaviour is correct. Since we also
> spell 'behaviour' differently, it's not surprising that we're talking
> past each other. Not the same language, y'know; wrong locale. :)
No doubt, but I'm certain the Queen and I agree on Jim's and my
as stated above. The statement was unambiguously about "case-equivalence"
and the letters A and a are in no way case-equivalent, in any
English nor in any particular locale. Also, I've always failed [American]
spelling (I'm equally bad at the Queen's English), as Mike was kind enough
point out and correct me earlier today :)
Thankfully there is no s/z ambiguity in the word 'interpretation', LOL!
But we do all seem to all be on the same page, irrespective of locale.
I really want to thank everyone at Subversion who put this code together,
it was very well thought-out. I'd like to figure out how to restore the
of svn committer contributions to the core APR libraries, as well as httpd
committer contributions, and all the other downstream consumer developer's
efforts. We have always had a very relaxed committer admission policy,
with a very strict API policy, but it really is not hard to work with.
If you are new to the conversation, include/apr_cstr.h has absorbed much of
the efforts of svn_cstring_* API's into apr_cstr_* functions. I'd like to
of this and encourage you all to offer up enhancements. I imagine 1.6 is not
so far away, and with luck and enough contributions, we offer up a 1.7,
a 1.8 before we launch the unified apr+apr-util 2.0 sometime this year.
Received on 2016-01-28 05:40:16 CET