Unicode 7

[Rustom Mody]

On Friday, May 2, 2014 5:25:37 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Fri, 02 May 2014 03:39:34 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote:

> > On Friday, May 2, 2014 2:15:41 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >> On Thu, 01 May 2014 19:02:48 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote:
> >> > - Worst of all what we
> >> > *dont* see -- how many others dont see what we see?
> >> Again, this a deficiency of the font. There are very few code points in
> >> Unicode which are intended to be invisible, e.g. space, newline, zero-
> >> width joiner, control characters, etc., but they ought to be equally
> >> invisible to everyone. No printable character should ever be invisible
> >> in any decent font.
> > Thats not what I meant.
> > I wrote http://blog.languager.org/2014/04/unicoded-python.html
> >  – mostly on a debian box.
> > Later on seeing it on a less heavily setup ubuntu box, I see
> >  ⟮ ⟯ ⟬ ⟭ ⦇ ⦈ ⦉ ⦊
> > have become 'missing-glyph' boxes.
> > It leads me ask, how much else of what I am writing, some random reader
> > has simply not seen?
> > Quite simply we can never know – because most are going to go away
> > saying "mojibaked/garbled rubbish"
> > Speaking of what you understood of what I said: Yes invisible chars is
> > another problem I was recently bitten by. I pasted something from google
> > into emacs' org mode. Following that link again I kept getting a broken
> > link.
> > Until I found that the link had an invisible char
> > The problem was that emacs was faithfully rendering that char according
> > to standard, ie invisibly!

> And you've never been bitten by an invisible control character in ASCII 
> text? You've lived a sheltered life!

For control characters Ive seen:
- garbage (the ASCII equiv of mojibake)
- Straight ^A^B^C
- Maybe their names NUL,SOH,STX,ETX,EOT,ENQ,ACK…
- Or maybe just a little dot .
- More pathological behavior: a control sequence putting the
  terminal into some other mode

But I dont ever remember seeing a control character become
invisible (except [ \t\n\f])