New full Unicode for ES6 idea

Bill Frantz frantz at
Sun Feb 19 22:02:38 PST 2012

On 2/19/12 at 21:45, allen at (Allen Wirfs-Brock) wrote:

>I really don't think any Unicode semantics should be build into 
>the basic string representation.  We need to decide on a max 
>element size and Unicode motivates 21 bits, but it could be 
>32-bits.  Personally, I've lived through enough address space 
>exhaustion episodes in my career be skeptical of "small" values 
>like 2^21 being good enough for the long term.

Can we future-proof any limit an implementation may chose by 
saying that all characters whose code point is too large for a 
particular implementation must be replaced by an "invalid 
character" code point (which fits into the implementation's 
representation size) on input? An implementation which chooses 
21 bits as the size will become obsolete when Unicode characters 
that need 22 bits are defined. However it will still work with 
characters that fit in 21 bits, and will do something rational 
with ones that do not. Users who need characters in the over 21 
bit set will be encouraged to upgrade.

Cheers - Bill

Bill Frantz        | If the site is supported by  | Periwinkle
(408)356-8506      | ads, you are the product.    | 16345 
Englewood Ave |                              | Los Gatos, 
CA 95032

More information about the es-discuss mailing list