1,645 reputation
31839
bio website
location Singapore
age
visits member for 3 years, 11 months
seen 2 days ago

Will only answer questions with incorrect, suboptimal, or missing answers. All my posts are necromancers, with 25% of them badged as such.


Quora link.


Jul
5
comment What is the difference between btree and rtree indexing?
Does MySQL support Rtrees?
Jun
24
awarded  Popular Question
Jun
20
comment “Interface” vs. “layer”
So what's the difference between interface and protocol ?
Jun
20
comment Do we actually have to pay to make Windows Phone, Android, or iPhone apps?
As of now the answer is accepted since it is the best out of the 4. If someone posts a better answer, the accepted answer will change.
Jun
20
comment Do we actually have to pay to make Windows Phone, Android, or iPhone apps?
@Caleb Yes the question is about "hidden" costs. If you think my English is bad, feel free to edit my post. And yes it's totally unexpected that there is no way to develop iPhone apps unless I first buy a mac.
Jun
20
comment Do we actually have to pay to make Windows Phone, Android, or iPhone apps?
@Caleb Not true, big companies are good at hidden costs. This thread makes clear what hidden costs there are. Also sometimes there are alternative cheaper solutions to development then the one listed on the official sites which often require us to buy their hardware/software.
Jun
8
awarded  Caucus
May
13
comment what limitation will we face if each user-perceived character is assigned to one codepoint?
@tchrist As in your example, in Greek, we can't simply combine a Ω + ´ + ` + ῾ because it doesn't belong to that language. I grant that you can combine Ω with ´ because it is valid in Greek. I grant that you can combine Ι + ´ + ¨ because it is valid as well. But combinations aren't arbitrary in a natural language. Even after adding all possible variations of diacritic combinations, Greek has only 188 characters. What's wrong with giving each of them a unique code point?
May
13
comment what limitation will we face if each user-perceived character is assigned to one codepoint?
@tchrist For example, in Japanese we can't simply combine a + + because it doesn't make any sense in that language. Yes I'm aware Unicode allows us to combine a + + , my argument is that that shouldn't have happened in the first place. Unicode should have just assigned a unique code point to each character for the ~7000 natural languages used on Earth.
May
13
comment what limitation will we face if each user-perceived character is assigned to one codepoint?
@tchrist I hope we attack the argument and not the person. Your argument is that they are valid because they are legit Unicode extended grapheme clusters. My argument is that Unicode shouldn't have made them legit because the result isn't a valid character in any natural language at all. Math notations, emoticons, elf languages, and IPA transcriptions are irrelevant to the argument. I'm arguing against using diacritics for the ~7000 natural languages used on Earth. goo.gl/lq7Xd, goo.gl/C2dn
May
13
comment what limitation will we face if each user-perceived character is assigned to one codepoint?
@tchrist I don't understand why you are bringing in style rules here. Underlining and bolding are effects on characters. For example, a "z" character whether underlined or bolded is the same thing in English. I'm talking about the characters a natural language uses. My point is that the total number of characters in the ~7000 natural languages used on Earth is below 4b. So Unicode should have just kept it simple and assign 1 number to each of them. Even the number of Chinese characters is only roughly 100k+, let it expand by 1000 times and we have 100 million+, still far from 4b.
May
13
comment what limitation will we face if each user-perceived character is assigned to one codepoint?
@tchrist Iterating graphemes is starkly different than iterating words. In a language, there's no fixed number of possible word combinations, but there's certainly a fixed number of possible characters. As an example, Unicode allows us to merge e with with with ˆ with ˝. But the resulting character is unused in any language. It is unlikely that there are 2^32 (4 billion) standalone characters, because there's no such thing as language characters being subject to infinite variation.
Apr
30
awarded  Yearling
Mar
30
awarded  Nice Question
Mar
24
awarded  Popular Question
Mar
22
awarded  Notable Question
Feb
2
revised what limitation will we face if each user-perceived character is assigned to one codepoint?
added 330 characters in body
Feb
1
comment what limitation will we face if each user-perceived character is assigned to one codepoint?
Instead they prefer spending time on the fun things like creating code points for "poker cards" and really cute emojis unicode.org/versions/Unicode6.1.0 which by the way aren't part of any language under the sun and by the way too, are going out of scope of what they were borned to do.
Feb
1
comment what limitation will we face if each user-perceived character is assigned to one codepoint?
need a better encoding system. A system that does one thing and one thing well en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_philosophy, in essence it should focus on assigning code points and forget about encoding issues. Why don't the Unicode people understand what's divide-and-conquer? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_and_conquer
Feb
1
comment what limitation will we face if each user-perceived character is assigned to one codepoint?
code points stackoverflow.com/q/9047318/632951), now we wouldn't be talking about allographs, diagraphs, graphemes, ligatures, grapheme clusters, glyphs etc etc. Yes the encoding issue would still persist, but compared to this Unicode mess of having code points all over the place and used for multiple purposes, encoding issues are nonexistent. Seriously Unicode Is Flawed, we