Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

8
  • 2
    New? 1993 isn't exactly new. Commented Mar 31, 2014 at 22:36
  • 3
    @whatsisname: Relatively new. ASCII is 1963, code pages around 1981. The web only 50% in 2008. Plenty of older stuff out there. Commented Apr 1, 2014 at 0:05
  • I'm not sure what you're getting at with #3 and #5. Are you saying languages require source files to be 7 bit ASCII? Then that should be just another example of legacy systems/data/protocols. And for #5, unless you're referring to legacy systems, you should elaborate why it's "easiest". Also, #6 doesn't make sense to me. Even if it's not "needed" you can simplify everything, improve user experience, and rule out several kinds of data mangling by simply using UTF-8 whenever possible. That it's not needed should make no difference since using UTF-8 should be at least as easy, if not easier. Commented Apr 1, 2014 at 6:45
  • @delnan: See edits. I know it won't satisfy everyone, but these are genuine answers to the question as put. Commented Apr 1, 2014 at 10:27
  • 2
    ASCII was being merrily misunderstood back in the early 1990's. Our printer thought # should render as £, which made C code rather “different” to read… Commented Apr 1, 2014 at 13:24