[erlang-questions] unicode:characters_to_list

[Henning Diedrich]

On 3/22/12 3:57 PM, Masklinn wrote:
>> 248 is not a valid unicode Bytecode.
> 248 is in fact a valid codepoint,
Yes, that clarifies it, thanks.

Plus that Unicode codepoints can then be presented in different bit 
patterns, e.g. UTF-8, UTF-16, UTF-32.

I was confusing the Unicode codepoint and the UTF-8 bitpattern.

Thanks,
Henning
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20120323/37caf037/attachment.htm>