Re: git on MacOSX and files with decomposed utf-8 file names

From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Jan 17, 2008, 18:42 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.00.0801171017460.14959@woody.linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <478F99E7.1050503@web.de>

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Mark Junker wrote:

> 
> Sorry, but you're using different characters that look the same. But Kevins
> point was that it's a different thing if you use two characters that look the
> same or the same character with different encodings.

But that's exactly the case he gave - 'ä' vs 'a¨' are exactly that: different strings (not even characters: the second is actually a multi-character) that just look the same.

You try to twist the argument by just claiming that they are the same "character". They aren't, unless you *define* character to be the same as "glyph". Of course, if you claim that, then you can always support your argument, but I claim that is a bogus and incorrect axiom to start with!

Too many people confuse "character" and "glyph". They are different.

See, for example

	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode

and notice the *many* places where they try to make that distinction between "character" and "glyph" clear (and also "code values", which are the actual bytes that encode a character).

See also

	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode_normalization

and realize that a Unicode sequence is a sequence of *characters* even if it is not normalized! Those things are still characters, when they are the "simpler" non-combined characters.

You are trying to make a totally BOGUS argument, and you base it on the INCORRECT basis that the TWO characters 'a'+'¨' somehow aren't independent characters. They *are*. They are *different* characters from 'ä', even though they may be "Canonically equivalent" as a sequence.

The fact is that "equivalent" does not mean "same". Why cannot people accept that?

			Linus