The Case Against Autodecode

[Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d]

On 05/29/2016 09:42 AM, Tobias M wrote:
> On Friday, 27 May 2016 at 19:43:16 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 03:30:53PM -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu via
>> Digitalmars-d wrote:
>>> On 5/27/16 3:10 PM, ag0aep6g wrote:
>>> > I don't think there is value in distinguishing by language. > The
>>> point of Unicode is that you shouldn't need to do that.
>>>
>>> It seems code points are kind of useless because they don't really
>>> mean anything, would that be accurate? -- Andrei
>>
>> That's what we've been trying to say all along! :-P  They're a kind of
>> low-level Unicode construct used for building "real" characters, i.e.,
>> what a layperson would consider to be a "character".
>
> Code points are *the fundamental unit* of unicode. AFAIK most (all?)
> algorithms in the unicode spec are defined in terms of code points.
> Sure, some algorithms also work on the code unit level. That can be used
> as an optimization, but they are still defined on code points.
>
> Code points are also abstracting over the different representations
> (UTF-...), providing a uniform "interface".

So now code points are good? -- Andrei