Message123283
| Author |
belopolsky |
| Recipients |
Rhamphoryncus, amaury.forgeotdarc, belopolsky, eric.smith, ezio.melotti, lemburg, loewis, pitrou, rhettinger, vstinner |
| Date |
2010年12月03日.19:26:58 |
| SpamBayes Score |
3.1839415e-06 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<AANLkTi=KyP7XoanUJ=qwM5OV2uGHX5RUcb5eV-rhLnft@mail.gmail.com> |
| In-reply-to |
<1290901131.19.0.735396835024.issue10542@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| Content |
On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 6:38 PM, Raymond Hettinger
<report@bugs.python.org> wrote:
..
> I suggest Py_UNICODE_ADVANCE() to avoid false suggestion that the iterator protocol is being used.
>
As a data point, ICU defines U16_NEXT() for similar purpose. I also
like ICU terminology for surrogates ("lead" and "trail") better than
the backward "high" and "low". The U16_APPEND() suggests
Py_UNICODE_APPEND instead of PUT_NEXT (this one has a virtue of not
having "next" in the name as well.) I still like NEXT better than
ADVANCE because it is shorter and has an obvious PREV counterpart that
we may want to add later.
Note that ICU uses U16_ prefix for these macros even when they operate
on 32-bit characters.
More at
http://icu-project.org/apiref/icu4c/utf16_8h.html
http://userguide.icu-project.org/strings |
|