The Case For Autodecode

[Kagamin via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 3 June 2016 at 11:24:40 UTC, ag0aep6g wrote:
> Finally, this is not the only argument in favor of *keeping* 
> autodecoding, of course. Not wanting to break user code is the 
> big one there, I guess.

A lot of discussion is disagreement on understanding of 
correctness of unicode support. I see 4 possible meanings here:
1. Implemented according to spec.
2. Provides level 1 unicode support.
3. Provides level 2 unicode support.
4. Achieves the goal of unicode, i.e. text processing according 
to natural language rules.