|
|
|
|
|
|
by jibal
301 days ago
|
|
|
non sequitur ... I simply pointed out a mistaken claim and your comment is about something quite different. (Also that's not what "character" means in the Unicode framework--some code points correspond to characters and some don't.) P.S. Everything about the response to this comment is wrong, especially the absurd baseless claim that I misunderstood the claim that I quoted and corrected (that's the only claim I responded to). |
|
|
My comment explains that you have misunderstood what the claim is. "Byte code format" was nonsensical (Unicode is not interpreted by a VM), but the point that comment was trying to make (as I understood it) is that not all subsequences of a valid sequence of (assigned) code points are valid.
> Also that's not what "character" means in the Unicode framework--some code points correspond to characters and some don't.
My definition does not contradict that. A code point is an integer in the Unicode code space which may correspond to a character. When it does, "character" trivially means the thing that the code point corresponds to, i.e., represents, as I said.