Re: g_utf8_validate() and NUL characters

["Brian J. Tarricone" <bjt23 cornell edu>]

Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> Havoc Pennington wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 4:42 PM, coda <coda trigger gmail com> wrote: 
> > > Is there any reason not to support NUL/U+0000 in strings?
>>
> > The point of not allowing nul in g_utf8_validate() I think is that nul
> > is not valid text. It may be valid unicode in some technical sense,
> > but it isn't text, in the same sense that malformed utf8 isn't text.
>
> What's so weird about NUL bytes Havoc?  There is text, and there is
> nul-terminated text.  In the former, a NUL byte is as valid as any other valid
> UTF-8 character.

I think what he really meant (or if not, here's my take on it) was that 
NUL bytes aren't *printable* text... like you'd say of low-value ASCII 
data.  Sure, it's technically "text," but most of it isn't something you 
can represent visually in a useful manner.

	-brian