[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lynx-dev LYLowerCase EBCDIC Crash [PATCH]
From: |
pg |
Subject: |
Re: lynx-dev LYLowerCase EBCDIC Crash [PATCH] |
Date: |
Mon, 22 Oct 2001 08:56:06 -0600 (MDT) |
In a recent note, Thomas E. Dickey said:
> Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 10:28:26 -0400 (EDT)
>
> would a 0x00 be legal following the 0x80? (If not, we could add a check
> for that special case).
>
I defer that one to the Unicode/UTF8/CJK/Big5 experts. Such a check
would be insurance for the multibyte cases, but might leave some
breakage for non-ASCII ISO8859 characters. Would a character with the
0x80 bit set be legal at the end of an ISO8859 string?
-- gil
--
StorageTek
INFORMATION made POWERFUL
; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden
- lynx-dev LYLowerCase EBCDIC Crash [PATCH], pg, 2001/10/22
- Re: lynx-dev LYLowerCase EBCDIC Crash [PATCH], Thomas E. Dickey, 2001/10/22
- Re: lynx-dev LYLowerCase EBCDIC Crash [PATCH], pg, 2001/10/22
- Re: lynx-dev LYLowerCase EBCDIC Crash [PATCH], Thomas E. Dickey, 2001/10/22
- Re: lynx-dev LYLowerCase EBCDIC Crash [PATCH], pg, 2001/10/22
- Re: lynx-dev LYLowerCase EBCDIC Crash [PATCH], Thomas E. Dickey, 2001/10/22
- Re: lynx-dev LYLowerCase EBCDIC Crash [PATCH],
pg <=
- Re: lynx-dev LYLowerCase EBCDIC Crash [PATCH], Thomas E. Dickey, 2001/10/22
- Re: lynx-dev LYLowerCase EBCDIC Crash [PATCH], pg, 2001/10/22
- Re: lynx-dev LYLowerCase EBCDIC Crash [PATCH], Thomas E. Dickey, 2001/10/22
Re: lynx-dev LYLowerCase EBCDIC Crash [PATCH], pg, 2001/10/22