Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

sepcial characters....

2 views
Skip to first unread message

Ollie Riches

unread,
Dec 6, 2002, 9:49:08 AM12/6/02
to
what is the escape seqence for the copyright symbol is the default code page
in a .Net C# winforms application?

Cheers

Ollie


Nick Holmes

unread,
Dec 6, 2002, 10:11:12 AM12/6/02
to
Hey! its all Unicode these days, so you don't need one!

You an directly enter a © symbol (not sure it will show here) in the string,
from the editor - hold down ALT and key in 0169 on the number pad.

Alternatively, you can view, cut and paste many characters not on your
keyboard using the Character Map application.

--
Nick Holmes
Coyote Software, GmbH.


"Ollie Riches" <ollie_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Odj8mdTnCHA.1892@TK2MSFTNGP08...

Ollie Riches

unread,
Dec 6, 2002, 10:19:56 AM12/6/02
to
The answer is:-

\u00A9 in unicode

Ollie


"Nick Holmes" <nicknews...@coyXote-softXware.com> wrote in message
news:uD#0HpTnCHA.2428@TK2MSFTNGP08...

Nick Holmes

unread,
Dec 6, 2002, 10:26:32 AM12/6/02
to
As you like, but I think © is more readable than \u00A9.

"Ollie Riches" <ollie_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:eJUX0uTnCHA.2172@TK2MSFTNGP12...

Randy A. Ynchausti

unread,
Dec 6, 2002, 10:37:00 AM12/6/02
to
Ollie Riches

> what is the escape seqence for the copyright symbol is the default code
page
> in a .Net C# winforms application?

The ANSI/ISO 8859-1-1987 Latin Alphabet No. 1 has it listed as hex value A9.

Regards,

randy


Jon Skeet

unread,
Dec 6, 2002, 11:06:06 AM12/6/02
to
nicknews...@coyXote-softXware.com wrote:
> As you like, but I think © is more readable than \u00A9.

Yes, but \u00A9 is all in ASCII characters, which means you're much more
likely to be able to transport your source between different machines,
editors, etc, and still have it readable.

--
Jon Skeet
sk...@pobox.com - http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me at the same time

Nick Holmes

unread,
Dec 6, 2002, 11:54:32 AM12/6/02
to
Seems to me we have moved on from ASCII, though.

We have previously built an application that had some non-ASCII strings in
it, but, to be honest, a colleague has just reminded me that we needed to
explicitly save the source code in a Unicode format. They've never become
unreadable!

I live in a very multilingual environment (my 4 year old son speaks 3
languages fluently), and workwise we, as a matter of course, do everything
in Unicode, like using nchar and nvarchar in database fields.


"Jon Skeet" <sk...@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.185adb4e6...@10.1.1.14...

Jon Skeet

unread,
Dec 6, 2002, 1:55:58 PM12/6/02
to
nicknews...@coyXote-softXware.com wrote:
> Seems to me we have moved on from ASCII, though.
>
> We have previously built an application that had some non-ASCII strings in
> it, but, to be honest, a colleague has just reminded me that we needed to
> explicitly save the source code in a Unicode format. They've never become
> unreadable!

They become unreadable to someone who doesn't easily have access to an
editor which copes with Unicode. Many text editors would have to be
explicitly *told* the encoding, whereas practically everything will open
plain ASCII.

> I live in a very multilingual environment (my 4 year old son speaks 3
> languages fluently), and workwise we, as a matter of course, do everything
> in Unicode, like using nchar and nvarchar in database fields.

That's in terms of *coding* though - the fact that you had to be reminded
that you needed to explicitly save the code in a Unicode format shows
that this approach has pitfalls.

0 new messages