I have several files which include various strings in different written languages. The files I am working with are in the .inf format which is somewhat similar to .ini files.
I am inputting the text from these files into a parser which considers the [ symbol as the beginning of a 'category'. Therefore, it is important that this character does not accidentally appear in string sequences or parsing will fail because it interprets these as "control characters".
For example, this string contains some Japanese writings:
iANSProtocol_HELP="�C���e��(R) �A�h�o���X�g�E�l�b�g���[�N�E�T�[�r�X Protocol �̓`�[���������щ��z LAN �Ȃǂ̍��x�#�\�Ɏg�����܂��B"
DISKNAME ="�C���e��(R) �A�h�o���X�g�E�l�b�g���[�N�E�T�[�r�X CD-ROM �܂��̓t���b�s�[�f�B�X�N"
In my text-editors (Atom) default UTF-8 encoding this gives me garbage text which would not be an issue, however the 0x5B character is interpreted as [. Which causes the parser to fail because it assumes that this is signaling the beginning of a new category.
If I change the encoding to Japanese (CP 932), these characters are interpreted correctly as:
iANSProtocol_HELP="インテル(R) アドバンスト・ネットワーク・サービス Protocol はチーム化および仮想 LAN などの高度機能に使われます。"
DISKNAME ="インテル(R) アドバンスト・ネットワーク・サービス CD-ROM またはフロッピーディスク"
Of course I cannot encode every file to be Japanese because they may contain Chinese or other languages which will be written incorrectly.
What is the best course of action for this situation? Should I edit the code of the parser to escape characters inside string literals? Are there any special types of encoding that would allow me to see all special characters and languages?
Thanks
If the source file is in shift-jis, then you should use a parser that can support it, or convert the file to UTF-8 before you parse it.
I believe that this character set also uses ASCII as it's base type but it uses 2 bytes to for certain characters, so if 0x5B it probably doesn't appear as the 'first byte' of a character. (note: this is conjecture based on how I think shift-jis works).
So yea, you need to modify your parser to understand shift-jis, or you need to convert the file to UTF-8 before parsing. I imagine that converting is the easiest.
Related
From my Lua knowledge (and according to what I have read in Lua manuals), I've always been under impression that an identifier in Lua is only limited to A-Z & a-z & _ & digits (and can not start using a digit nor be a reserved keyword i.e. local local = 123).
And now I have run into some (obfuscated) Lua program which uses all kind of weird characters for an identifier:
https://i.imgur.com/HPLKMxp.png
-- Most likely, copy+paste won't work. Download the file from https://tknk.io/7HHZ
print(_VERSION .. " " .. (jit and "JIT" or "non-JIT"))
local T = {}
T.math = T.math or {}
T.math.​â®â€‹âŞâ®â€‹ď»żâ€Śâ€âŽ = math.sin
T.math.â¬â€‹ââ¬ââ«â®â€â€¬ = math.cos
for k, v in pairs(T.math) do print(k, v) end
Output:
Lua 5.1 JIT
â¬â€‹ââ¬ââ«â®â€â€¬ function: builtin#45
​â®â€‹âŞâ®â€‹ď»żâ€Śâ€âŽ function: builtin#44
It is unclear to me, why is this set of characters allowed for an identifier?
In other words, why is it a completely valid Lua program?
Unlike some languages, Lua is not really defined by a formal specification, one which covers every contingency and entirely explains all of Lua's behavior. Something as simple as "what character set is a Lua file encoded in" isn't really explain in Lua's documentation.
All the docs say about identifiers is:
Names (also called identifiers) in Lua can be any string of letters, digits, and underscores, not beginning with a digit and not being a reserved word.
But nothing ever really says what a "letter" is. There isn't even a definition for what character set Lua uses. As such, it's essentially implementation-dependent. A "letter" is... whatever the implementation wants it to be.
So, let's say you're writing a Lua implementation. And you want users to be able to provide Unicode-encoded strings (that is, strings within the Lua text). Lua 5.3 requires this. But you also don't want them to have to use UTF-16 encoding for their files (also because lua_load gets sequences of bytes, not shorts). So your Lua implementation assumes the byte sequence it gets in lua_load is encoded in UTF-8, so that users can write strings that use Unicode characters.
When it comes to writing the lexer/parser part of this implementation, how do you handle this? The simplest, easiest way to handle UTF-8 is to... not handle UTF-8. Indeed, that's the whole point of that encoding. Since everything that Lua defines with specific symbols are encoded in ASCII, and ASCII text is also UTF-8 text with the same meaning, you can basically treat a UTF-8 string like an ASCII string. For in-Lua strings, you just copy the sequence of bytes between the start and end characters of the string.
So how do you go about lexing identifiers? Well, you could ask the question above. Or you could ask a much simpler question: is the character a space, control character, digit, or symbol? A "letter" is merely something that isn't one of those.
Lua defines what things it considers to be "symbols". ASCII can tell you what is a control character, space, and a digit. In such an implementation, any UTF-8 code unit with a value outside of ASCII is a letter. Even if technically, those code units decode into something Unicode thinks of as a "symbol", your lexer just threats it as a letter.
This simple form of UTF-8 lexing gives you fast performance and low memory overhead. You don't have to decode UTF-8 into Unicode codepoints, and you don't need a giant Unicode table to tell you whether a codepoint is a "symbol" or "space" or whatever. And of course, it's also something that would naturally fall out of many ASCII-based Lua implementations.
So most Lua implementations will do it this way, if only by accident. Doing something more would require deliberate effort.
It also allows a user to use Unicode character sequences as identifiers. That means that someone can easily write code in their native language (outside of keywords).
But it also means that obfuscators have lots of ways to create "identifiers" that are just strings of nonsensical bytes. Indeed, because there are multiple ways in Unicode to "spell" the same apparent Unicode string (unless you examine the bytes directly), obfuscators can rig up identifiers that appear when rendered in a text editor to all be the same text, while actually being different strings.
To clarify there is only one identifier T
T.math is sugar syntax for T["math"] this also extends to the obfuscate strings. It is perfectly valid to have a key contain any characters or even start with a number.
Now being able to use the . rather then [ ] does not work with a string that don't conform to the identifier's limitations. See Nicol Bolas' answer for a great break down of those limitations.
If we type into firefox or chrome
http://☃.net/
It takes us to
http://xn--n3h.net/
Which is a mirror of unicodesnowmanforyou.com
What I don't understand is by what rules the unicode snowman can decode to xn--n3h, it doesn't look anything like utf-8 or urlencoding.
I think I found a hint while mucking around in python3, because:
>>> '☃'.encode('punycode')
b'n3h'
But I still don't understand the xn-- part. How are domain names internationalised, what is the standard and where is this stuff documented?
It uses an encoding scheme called Punycode (as you've already discovered from the Python testing you've done), capable of representing Unicode characters in ASCII-only format.
Each label (delimited by dots, so get.me.a.coffee.com has five labels) that contains Unicode characters is encoded in Punycode and prefixed with the string xn--.
The label encoding first copies all the ASCII characters, then appends the encoded Unicode characters. The Unicode characters are always after the final - in the label, so one is added after the ASCII characters if needed.
More detail can be found in this page over at the w3 site, and in RFC 3987. For details on how Punycode actually encodes labels, see the Wikipedia page.
For a work project I am using headless Squeak on a (displayless, remote) Linuxserver and also using Squeak on a Windows developer-machine.
Code on the developer machine is managed using Monticello. I have to copy the mcz to the server using SFTP unfortunately (e.g. having a push-repository on the server is not possible for security reasons). The code is then merged by eg:
MczInstaller installFileNamed: 'name-b.18.mcz'.
Which generally works.
Unfortunately our code-base contains strings that contain Umlauts and other non-ascii characters. During the Monticello-reimport some of them get replaced with other characters and some get replaced with nothing.
I also tried e.g.
MczInstaller installStream: (FileStream readOnlyFileNamed: '...') binary
(note .mcz's are actually .zip's, so binary should be appropriate, i guess it is the default anyway)
Finding out how to make Monticello's transfer preserve the Squeak internal-encoding of non-ascii's is the main Goal of my question. Changing all the source code to only use ascii-strings is (at least in this codebase) much less desirable because manual labor is involved. If you are interested in why it is not a simple grep-replace in this case read this side note:
(Side note: (A simplified/special case) The codebase uses Seaside's #text: method to render strings that contain chars that have to be html-escaped. This works fine with our non-ascii's e.g. it converts ä into ä, if we were to grep-replace the literal ä's by ä explicitly, then we would have to use the #html: method instead (else double-escape), however that would then require that we replace all other characters that have to be html-escaped as well (e.g. &), but then again the source-code itself contains such characters. And there are other cases, like some #text:'s that take third-party strings, they may not be replaced by #html's...)
Squeak does use unicode (ISO 10646) internally for encoding characters in a String.
It might use extension like CP1252 for characters in range 16r80 to: 16r9F, but I'm not really sure anymore.
The characters codes are written as is on the stream source.st, and these codes are made of a single byte for a ByteString when all characters are <= 16rFF. In this case, the file should look like encoded in ISO-8859-L1 or CP1252.
If ever you have character codes > 16rFF, then a WideString is used in Squeak. Once again the codes are written as is on the stream source.st, but this time these are 32 bits codes (written in big-endian order). Technically, the encoding is thus UTF-32BE.
Now what does MczInstaller does? It uses the snapshot/source.st file, and uses setConverterForCode for reading this file, which is either UTF-8 or MacRoman... So non ASCII characters might get changed, and this is even worse in case of WideString which will be re-interpreted as ByteString.
MC itself doesn't use the snapshot/source.st member in the archive.
It rather uses the snapshot.bin (see code in MCMczReader, MCMczWriter).
This is a binary file whose format is governed by DataStream.
The snippet that you should use is rather:
MCMczReader loadVersionFile: 'YourPackage-b.18.mcz'
Monticello isn't really aware of character encoding. I don't know the present situation in squeak but the last time I've looked into it there was an assumed character encoding of latin1. But that would mean it should work flawlessly in your situation.
It should work somehow anyway if you are writing and reading from the same kind of image. If the proper character encoding fails usually the internal byte representation is written from memory to disk. While this prevents any cross dialect exchange of packages it should work if using the same image kind.
Anyway there are things that should or could work but they often go wrong. So most projects try to avoid using non 7bit characters in their code.
You don't need to convert non 7bit characters to HTML entities. You can use
Character value: 228
for producing an ä in your code without using non 7bit characters. On every character you like to add a conversion you can do
$ä asciiValue => 228
I know this is not the kind of answer some would want to get. But monticello is one of these things that still need to be adjusted for proper character encoding.
I have some link resources with none latin characters like åäö
These are usually user uploaded files
The problem is that i am not successfull in encoding them
using filename.encodeAsURL seems to not encode it the right way
For example the character ö is turned into o%CC%88
Testing to type the same thing in firefox and copy the contents gives %C3%B6
What are the difference between these encodings and what should i use to get the correct encoding??
Both encodings are correct. You are actually seeing the encoding of two different strings.
The key here is noticing the o at the beginning of the string:
o%CC%88 is the letter o followed by Unicode Character Combining Diaeresis, which combines with the previous character when rendered.
%C3%B6 is Unicode Character Latin Small O With Diaeresis.
What you are seeing is that in the first case, the string entered is something like these two characters: o ¨, which are actually rendered as ö.
In the second case, it's the actual character ö.
My guess is you are seeing the difference between two different inputs.
Update based on below discussion: If you are dynamically processing Unicode characters, and you do not have control over the input methods, you can try to normalize the Unicode, using java.text.Normalizer (Java 1.6 or newer).
Normalizing attempts to ensure that all characters are consistently represented, so that accented characters are always represented by a combined character or always by the character+combining mark.
Rough example:
String.metaClass.normalizeUnicode = {
return java.text.Normalizer.normalize(delegate, java.text.Normalizer.Form.NFC)
}
input = input.normalizeUnicode()
There are four forms of normalization. I picked the one that seems to be best for your case based on the description of how they work, but you may prefer to try the other ones and see what works most consistently.
All that being said, if you are try to representing Unicode characters in a URL, and they are not being loaded and processed by the code directly, it's probably best to avoid using non-latin characters altogether. Not only does this have the benefit of consistently, but also significantly shorter and more legible URLs. boo.pdf is a lot easier to read than bo%CC%88o.pdf.
I'm importing an RSS feed from Tumblr into a Kynetx app. It appears that the RSS feed has some encoding issues, as apostrophes appear like this:
The feed (which you can find here) claims to be encoded in UTF-8.
Is there a way to specify the encoding or else replace those characters with regular apostrophes?
While not optimal, you could try to catch these encodings and replace them with the UTF-8 standard:
newstring = oldstring.replace(re/’/\'/);
This appears to be a case of a service that specifies UTF-8, but does't explicitly enforce it. I uploaded an image of the RSS feed that you provided. For comparison, I cut and pasted the text into a notepad document and then typed in the same text from my keyboard.
I don't know if you can tell from the image, but the apostrophe that is mangled is different from the apostrophe that is generated by my UTF-8 browser.
I suspect that this post was submitted via a Windows client. If you look at your encoding options, you will see an option for Western (Windows-1252).
Windows-1252 is a legacy encoding from windows that resembles ISO 8859-1, but substitutes some of their own characters for control characters in the ANSI standard and changes the location in the codepage of others.
A couple of quotes from the wikipedia page that I cite above:
It is very common to mislabel Windows-1252 text data with the charset label ISO-8859-1. Many web browsers and e-mail clients treat the MIME charset ISO-8859-1 as Windows-1252 characters in order to accommodate such mislabeling
Many Microsoft programs, such as Word will automatically substitute Windows-1252 characters when standard ASCII characters are entered, such as for "smart quotes" (e.g. substituting ’ for the apostrophe in a contraction) or substituting © for the three characters '(c)'.
KRL supports all of the language charsets supported by UTF-8, so it supports multi-byte international characters natively; however, that comes at the expense of being able to fudge encodings that is possible when you only have ISO-8859-1 or Windows-1252 to choose from.