On 30 October 2011 18:38, Jelmer Vernooij <email address hidden> wrote:
> Ah, fair enough. I was testing with \xc rather than \x0c, the latter of
> which actually decodes happily in utf8.
Well, '\xc' could mean either of two things:
1- the same as \x0c, a form feed
2- probably more likely, it combines with the following character in
the string to form a byte in 0xc0..0xcf, which is not a complete utf8
character and could fail depending what comes after
On 30 October 2011 18:38, Jelmer Vernooij <email address hidden> wrote:
> Ah, fair enough. I was testing with \xc rather than \x0c, the latter of
> which actually decodes happily in utf8.
Well, '\xc' could mean either of two things:
1- the same as \x0c, a form feed
2- probably more likely, it combines with the following character in
the string to form a byte in 0xc0..0xcf, which is not a complete utf8
character and could fail depending what comes after