From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-10-20 07:26:07
Peter Dimov wrote:
> Vladimir Prus wrote:
>> Eric Niebler wrote:
>>> No. "Normalization" doesn't always mean canonical decomposition.
>>> There are several canonical forms, some of which *require* the use of
>>> composite characters. In fact, the XML standard requires such a
>>> canonical form. A Unicode library cannot hide the issue of
>>> canonicalization from the user, because users will care which
>>> canonical form is being used.
>> Why? If I want to compare two string, I don't really care which
>> normalized form is used.
> But if you need a particular normalized form for other purposes (to store
> it into a database, perhaps), you have no way to obtain it from
Yes. But it's possible to have standalone "normalization" function, and
still use default normalized representation for the string class.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk