Fix Phobos dependencies on autodecoding

[Walter Bright]

On 8/15/2019 2:26 PM, a11e99z wrote:
> On Thursday, 15 August 2019 at 19:59:34 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 8/15/2019 12:44 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>>> There should only be a
>>> single way to represent a given character.
>>
>> Exactly. And two glyphs that render identically should be the same code point.
>>
> 
> if it was not sarcasm:
> different code points can ref to same glyphs not vice verse:
> A(EN,\u0041), A(RU,\u0410), A(EL,\u0391)
> else sorting for non English will not work.
> 
> even order(A<B) will be wrong for example such RU glyphs
> ABCEHKMOPTXacepuxy
> corresponds to next English letters by sound or meaning
> AVSENKMORTHaserihu
> as u can see even uppers and lowers don't exists as pairs and have different 
> meanings

Yes, I've heard this argument before.

The answer is that language should not be embedded in Unicode. It will lead to 
nothing but problems. The language is something externally assigned to a block 
of text, not the text itself, just like in printed text.

Again,

    a + b = c

Should those be separate code points? How about:

    a) one thing
    b) another