Re: Summary of state of utf-8 supported terminals

[Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...>]

On 07/03/2015 12:32 PM, sfeam wrote:
> On Friday, 03 July 2015 03:46:28 AM Daniel J Sebald wrote:
>> On 07/03/2015 12:42 AM, sfeam wrote:
>
>>> Did I miss a terminal you were interested in?
>>
>> JPEG works...
>>
>> I think I will just treat all working under utf8, except PostScript and
>> try to resolve the libgd issue separately.
>
> If JPEG works then PNG must work also.
> It is the same driver.
>
>> Note, I think there is an invalid ASCII character in the utf8.dem demo.
>
> Umm. It is a demo of UTF-8, not ASCII.

ASCII is the first code book of utf8, if I understand correctly.  The 
eighth bit in the first utf8 byte is an indication of longer than one 
byte code.  Most references group U+007F in with control codes:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTF-8
http://www.utf8-chartable.de/


>> When I tried compiling the latex output, the program complained about
>> an unfound character.
>
> I already noted that most latex installations do not handle the full
> range of characters.  Even if it handled \0177 is would almost certainly
> fail on the subsequent test lines.
>
>> I looked at the output in gvim and saw
>>
>> ...z{|}~}}
>>
>> the third last character which appears as ^? in gvim but may be another
>> glyph in your mail viewer.  That line in the demo is labeled 0061 -
>> 007E, but 7E is 126 and octal \177 is 127.  ASCII 127 is the [DEL],
>> which I'm guessing is not assigned a glyph.  I suggest removing \177
>> from utf8.dem.
>
> IMHO one goal of the demos is to provide a set of unit tests.
> The idea is to exercise everything and find out what may not be working
> on the system where the test is run.  It's kind of pointless to remove
> a test just because it succeeds in indicating a point of failure.

We've found that LaTeX and gvim don't like control characters in UTF-8 
format.  If gnuplot isn't processing control codes in some way, what is 
being tested?  If the U+007F is intentional, why not label the line 0061 
- 007F rather than 7E?

Dan