C059 aka Century Schoolbook L z URW ma brzydkie ogonki, ale TeX Gyre Schola ma za to wyraźnie za małe kropki nad „i” i „j”. Jak żyć?
C059 aka Century Schoolbook L z URW ma brzydkie ogonki, ale TeX Gyre Schola ma za to wyraźnie za małe kropki nad „i” i „j”. Jak żyć?
𐑢𐑲 𐑯𐑴𐑚𐑪𐑛𐑦 𐑑𐑴𐑤𐑛 𐑥𐑰 ·𐑛𐑧𐑚𐑾𐑯-𐑚𐑦𐑤𐑑 ·𐑓𐑲𐑼𐑓𐑪𐑒𐑕 𐑕𐑑𐑪𐑐𐑑 𐑮𐑦𐑒𐑢𐑲𐑼𐑦𐑙 ·𐑐𐑳𐑤𐑕𐑷𐑛𐑦𐑴 𐑕𐑧𐑝𐑩𐑯 𐑘𐑽𐑟 𐑩𐑜𐑴?! 𐑳𐑐𐑕𐑑𐑮𐑰𐑥 ·𐑓𐑲𐑼𐑓𐑪𐑒𐑕 𐑛𐑮𐑪𐑐𐑑 𐑞 𐑕𐑩𐑐𐑹𐑑 𐑓 𐑯𐑱𐑑𐑦𐑝 𐑷𐑛𐑦𐑴 𐑪𐑯 ·𐑤𐑦𐑯𐑩𐑒𐑕 9 𐑘𐑽𐑟 𐑩𐑜𐑴, 𐑯 𐑲𐑝 𐑚𐑰𐑯 𐑿𐑟𐑦𐑙 apulse 𐑤𐑲𐑒 𐑩𐑯 𐑦𐑛𐑦𐑩𐑑 𐑧𐑝𐑼 𐑕𐑦𐑯𐑕.
A+ is dead. Well, looks like its website died a while ago, but it just dropped out of the debian archive today. Array languages saw some kind of renaissance in recent years with a number of new ones popping up, but A+ has long fallen into obsolescence. Truth be told, I haven’t used it in a long time either.
Maybe I should order Gemini to rewrite it for me.
Not sure what I expected. AI trying to write code is literally the XKCD’s StackSort. Why is it always so disappointing when so many people (?) share success stories? Maybe they are using the paid version, or secret prompt engineering techniques. Rubber ducks were much more energy efficient.
A jak cię skrosują, to mów, że to nie twoja noga.
F* today’s chromium build (140) no longer allows reenabling “unsupported” extensions… easily. Okay, it’s still possible. Whew (感谢 xiaoqing). Looks like the possibility to rewrite what I needed in mv3 was added in March in 135. Maybe that will be enough. But it still needs to be completely rewritten and forcing everything into service worker scheme makes it slower, error prone, and requires a LOT more code. Maybe I should order Gemini to rewrite it for me.
Make sure you nible your sibkinlings consensually.
Dear #langblr, how is it even possible for Turkish güzel and the Wanderwort gazelle (< غزال) not to be related?
𐑲 𐑖𐑫𐑛 𐑐𐑮𐑪𐑚𐑩𐑚𐑤𐑦 𐑕𐑑𐑪𐑐 𐑐𐑴𐑕𐑑𐑦𐑙 𐑖𐑦𐑑 𐑩𐑚𐑬𐑑 ·𐑛𐑿𐑴𐑤𐑦𐑙𐑜𐑴, 𐑚𐑳𐑑 𐑦𐑑𐑕 𐑗𐑲𐑯𐑰𐑟 𐑒𐑹𐑕 𐑦𐑯𐑒𐑹𐑐𐑼𐑱𐑑𐑩𐑛 𐑞 𐑒𐑨𐑮𐑩𐑒𐑑𐑼 𐑤𐑧𐑕𐑩𐑯𐑟 𐑦𐑯𐑑𐑵 𐑞 𐑥𐑱𐑯 𐑕𐑯𐑱𐑒, 𐑯 𐑦𐑑 𐑿𐑟𐑩𐑟 𐑞 𐑡𐑨𐑐𐑩𐑯𐑰𐑟 𐑝𐑺𐑾𐑯𐑑 𐑝 将 𐑨𐑟 𐑦𐑯 麻将 𐑦𐑯𐑕𐑑𐑧𐑛 𐑝 𐑞 𐑕𐑑𐑨𐑯𐑛𐑼𐑛 𐑢𐑳𐑯.
Duolingo Ukrainian course keeps using the word ‘довідкa’. No, this is not a typo, at least not mine. The last letter is the Latin ‘a’ rather than Cyrillic ‘а’. The difference shouldn’t really be visible in any half-decent font, but thanks to webfonts and TTS, it actually stands out a lot.
C23 introduced a “digit separator” for readability, so that you can write 100'000'000 and not break your brain counting the zeroes.
Except in the PDF it is always rendered as the Unicode ’ U+2019 RIGHT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK, not the ASCII ’ U+0027 APOSTROPHE, and never specified otherwise anywhere.
So technically, the standard separator is ’, not ’.
This actually sent me down a rabbit hole. At some point between C11 (N1570) and C17 (N2176), all single quotes were changed to U+2019, down to section 5.2.1 which describes the character sets; AFAICT this is the only character of the standard character set which is not ASCII.
That means that you can find examples in the standard, that you cannot cannot compile, because all compilers I tried rejected U+2019.
Nobody said it has to be ASCII; EBCDIC is fine too!
It reminds me of when an online version of one dictionary used U+3003 ⟨〃⟩ in its definition of the term “ditto mark” and Wikipedia editors tried to use that lexicographic source to support invalid typographic claims it never actually made.
It’s not like the incidental font encoding used in the PDF has any normative value. The text of the mentioned section explicitly says the values of the members of the source character set are implementation defined, and that the character that appears to be represented with ⟨’⟩ in the PDF belongs to the required basic subset and so its value must fit in a byte.
At least it’s not ALGOL with its delimiters that look like English words but are indivisible symbols not made of regular letters. Try making that copiable from PDF.
“·𐑐𐑨𐑯𐑑𐑦 𐑯 ·𐑕𐑑𐑪𐑒𐑦𐑙𐑟” 𐑚𐑳𐑑 “𐑓𐑭𐑕𐑑 𐑯 𐑓𐑘𐑫𐑼𐑦𐑩𐑕”
𐑢𐑲𐑤 𐑛𐑦𐑓𐑲𐑯𐑦𐑙 𐑢𐑪𐑑 𐑩 𐑐𐑮𐑪𐑐𐑼 𐑯𐑱𐑥 𐑦𐑟 𐑦𐑟 𐑡𐑧𐑯𐑘𐑫𐑦𐑯𐑤𐑦 𐑛𐑦𐑓𐑦𐑒𐑩𐑤𐑑 𐑯 𐑣𐑦𐑯𐑡𐑩𐑟 𐑪𐑯 𐑳𐑯𐑕𐑪𐑤𐑝𐑛 𐑓𐑦𐑤𐑩𐑕𐑪𐑓𐑦𐑒𐑩𐑤 𐑐𐑮𐑪𐑚𐑤𐑩𐑥𐑟, 𐑦𐑑𐑕 𐑕𐑨𐑛 𐑑 𐑕𐑰 𐑐𐑰𐑐𐑩𐑤 𐑕𐑩𐑒𐑳𐑥 𐑑 𐑿𐑟𐑦𐑙 𐑞 𐑯𐑱𐑥𐑼 𐑛𐑪𐑑 𐑨𐑟 𐑦𐑓 𐑦𐑑 𐑢𐑻 𐑩 𐑕𐑳𐑚𐑕𐑑𐑦𐑑𐑿𐑑 𐑓 𐑒𐑨𐑐𐑦𐑑𐑩𐑤 𐑤𐑧𐑑𐑼𐑟, 𐑓𐑪𐑤𐑴𐑦𐑙 𐑞 𐑦𐑮𐑨𐑑𐑦𐑒 𐑮𐑵𐑤𐑟 𐑝 𐑞 𐑑𐑮𐑩𐑛𐑦𐑖𐑩𐑯𐑩𐑤 𐑹𐑔𐑪𐑜𐑮𐑩𐑓𐑦. 𐑖𐑱𐑝𐑾𐑯 𐑦𐑟 𐑦𐑯𐑑𐑧𐑯𐑖𐑩𐑯𐑩𐑤𐑦 𐑩 𐑿𐑯𐑦𐑒𐑱𐑕 𐑕𐑒𐑮𐑦𐑐𐑑.
𐑿 𐑛𐑴𐑯𐑑 𐑯𐑰𐑛 𐑞 𐑛𐑪𐑑 𐑨𐑑 𐑷𐑤 𐑓 𐑚𐑫𐑒 𐑹 𐑥𐑵𐑝𐑦 𐑑𐑲𐑑𐑩𐑤𐑟 𐑹 𐑢𐑧𐑯 𐑞 𐑯𐑱𐑥 𐑦𐑟 𐑷𐑤𐑮𐑧𐑛𐑦 𐑜𐑮𐑨𐑓𐑦𐑒𐑤𐑦 𐑛𐑦𐑕𐑑𐑦𐑙𐑜𐑢𐑦𐑖𐑑 (𐑨𐑟 𐑦𐑯 𐑞 𐑯𐑱𐑥 𐑓𐑰𐑤𐑛 𐑝 𐑘𐑹 𐑕𐑴𐑖𐑩𐑤 𐑥𐑰𐑛𐑾 𐑐𐑮𐑴𐑓𐑲𐑤). 𐑦𐑑𐑕 𐑷𐑤𐑕𐑴 𐑕𐑦𐑤𐑦 𐑑 𐑿𐑟 𐑥𐑹 𐑞𐑨𐑯 𐑢𐑳𐑯 𐑛𐑪𐑑 𐑐𐑻 𐑯𐑱𐑥 𐑦𐑯 𐑥𐑳𐑤𐑑𐑦-𐑢𐑻𐑛 𐑯𐑱𐑥𐑟. 𐑦𐑑𐑕 𐑥𐑦𐑕𐑤𐑰𐑛𐑦𐑙 𐑦𐑯 𐑞 𐑐𐑮𐑧𐑟𐑩𐑯𐑕 𐑝 𐑒𐑩𐑯𐑡𐑳𐑙𐑒𐑖𐑩𐑯𐑟 𐑹 𐑐𐑮𐑧𐑐𐑩𐑟𐑦𐑖𐑩𐑯𐑟, 𐑯 𐑕𐑑𐑦𐑤 𐑕𐑵𐑐𐑻𐑓𐑤𐑫𐑩𐑕 𐑦𐑯 𐑳𐑞𐑼 𐑒𐑱𐑕𐑩𐑟. 𐑦𐑑 𐑦𐑟 𐑐𐑪𐑕𐑩𐑚𐑩𐑤 𐑑 𐑒𐑳𐑥 𐑳𐑐 𐑢𐑦𐑞 𐑩 𐑕𐑧𐑯𐑑𐑩𐑯𐑕 𐑢𐑺 𐑦𐑑𐑕 𐑨𐑥𐑚𐑦𐑜𐑘𐑫𐑩𐑕 𐑢𐑺 𐑞 𐑯𐑱𐑥 𐑧𐑯𐑛𐑟, 𐑚𐑳𐑑 𐑦𐑑𐑕 𐑰𐑒𐑢𐑩𐑤𐑦 𐑑𐑮𐑵 𐑩𐑚𐑬𐑑 𐑷𐑤 𐑞 𐑳𐑞𐑼 𐑯𐑬𐑯 𐑓𐑮𐑱𐑟𐑩𐑟 𐑨𐑟 𐑢𐑧𐑤. `((((· 𐑤𐑦𐑕𐑐) 𐑐𐑮𐑴𐑜𐑮𐑨𐑥𐑼𐑟) (𐑥𐑱𐑑 𐑚𐑰) 𐑳𐑯𐑕𐑨𐑑𐑦𐑕𐑓𐑲𐑛) (𐑚𐑳𐑑 (𐑐𐑰𐑐𐑩𐑤 𐑒𐑨𐑯 𐑑𐑧𐑤)))
𐑴𐑝𐑼-𐑛𐑪𐑑𐑦𐑙 𐑜𐑴𐑟 𐑩𐑜𐑧𐑯𐑕𐑑 𐑞 𐑕𐑐𐑦𐑮𐑦𐑑 𐑝 𐑖𐑱𐑝𐑾𐑯. 𐑢𐑰 𐑛𐑦𐑛𐑩𐑯𐑑 𐑜𐑧𐑑 𐑮𐑦𐑛 𐑝 𐑳𐑯𐑒𐑵𐑔 𐑚𐑩𐑕𐑦𐑤𐑲 𐑓𐑮𐑪𐑥 𐑕𐑳𐑥 𐑝 𐑒𐑩𐑯𐑑𐑮𐑨𐑒𐑖𐑩𐑯𐑟 𐑡𐑳𐑕𐑑 𐑑 𐑒𐑩𐑯𐑑𐑮𐑨𐑒𐑑 𐑩 𐑯𐑿 𐑛𐑦𐑟𐑰𐑟.
wtf with tumblr showing me weird imagery stylized for ’00s anime aesthetics “based on your likes?” it sure is more pleasant to my eyes that all that ’20s crap, but it’s obviously only stylization and it’s hella uncanny; being described as “retro” or tags like “#moecore” with a bunch of ribbon emoji don’t make it any better…