Unicode-compliant islower/uppercase #38574
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
stevengj
added
unicode
|
Along the way, I noticed that:
|
|
Probably this is too late for 1.6, so I'll wait to add NEWS until the 1.7-dev cycle. |
Since we've branched it sounds like now is a good time to add that. |
stevengj
force-pushed
the
sgj/islowerupper
branch
from
7fda7df
to
0f2d140
Compare
|
Fixed the NEWS. |
StefanKarpinski
approved these changes
Dec 18, 2020
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good to me. This can be squash-merged if you're done with it, @stevengj.
ElOceanografo
pushed a commit
to ElOceanografo/julia
that referenced
this pull request
May 4, 2021
* Unicode-compliant islower/uppercase * don't test isletter for non-L* letters * include titlecase in alphas test * add news
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Closes #36618, using the new
utf8proc_islowerandutf8proc_isupperfunctions from utf8proc 2.6 (which we upgraded to in #38551).Technically breaking, but I'm not sure who would be relying on the slight differences between the old behavior and the Unicode standard definitions?