[erlang-questions] correct terminology for referring to strings

CGS <>
Tue Jul 31 18:00:56 CEST 2012


Actually, that depends on the environment you are working in, I suppose.
Testing in my local environment, I got this:

1> io:format("~ts~n",[[16#00E9]]).
é
ok
2> io:format("~ts~n",[[16#0065,16#0301]]).
e ́
ok
3> io:format("~ts~n",[[16#0301,16#0065]]).
 ́e
ok

CGS





On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Fred Hebert <> wrote:

>
> On 12-07-31 11:19 AM, Fred Hebert wrote:
>
> The tricky thing is that if I enter a string containing " ́e" in my module
> and later reverse it, I will get "é" and not "e ́" as a final result. What
> was initially [16#0301,16#0065] gets reversed into [16#0065,16#0301], which
> is not the same as the correct visual representation " ́e" (represented
> as ([16#0065, $ , 16#0301]), with an implicit space in there)
>
>  Quick note that the last " ́e" in there  (possibly in red, depending of
> your mail client) should have been "e ́", which is represented as
> [16#0065, $ , 16#0301]. Sorry for the confusion.
>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> 
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20120731/ecb17463/attachment.html>


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list