Time we switched to unicode?

[Steven D'Aprano]

On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 18:24:10 +0100, Chris “Kwpolska” Warrick wrote:

> Oh: and speaking of fancy Unicode characters that are worthless
> ~duplicates, spot the difference here:
> 
> µ μ

I take exception to your description of them as *worthless* duplicates. 
"Unfortunate" would be a better choice of word.

Unicode has (at least) two aims:

- to include every "character" used in human language (please, 
  no arguments about what defines a character); and

- to losslessly represent every character available in the
  dozens of legacy code pages and character sets.


It's that second requirement -- specifically the "lossless" part -- that 
leads to such annoyances as µ and μ.



-- 
Steven D'Aprano
http://import-that.dreamwidth.org/