> > Urxvt's behaviour is also the same as Xterm with an added bonus: it
> > actually renders the combined Unicode sequence where as on Xterm and st,
As far as I know, this should be the correct behaviour, but I am not sure
about if we need to add this feature, because if you can use the unicode
character instead of the unicode sequence. If the modification is easy
and small we will accept it.
> > I don't have a patch or any immediate plans to look into patching it but
> > perhaps improve Unicode support could be added to the TODO list.
Well, I don't know exactly the complexity of this modification, so we could
talk a bit before of including it in the TODO list.
> I don’t know if this has already been discussed but this kind of
> characters really seems to be a hassle to support: variable terminal
> line, potentially more than twice as long as they actually are
I have a similar feeling, but I am not sure about this.
> we don’t want to add. But I agree with you, if we want to have a true
> and accurate support of Unicode, we should have this.
Indeed.
--
Roberto E. Vargas Caballero
Received on Tue Jul 08 2014 - 20:52:16 CEST