Am Tue, 2 Oct 2018 11:29:46 +0200 schrieb Hans Hagen:
Can't you check for a free range instead?
sure, but then i also loose some functionality in context (unless i gho for ugly solutions) ... as all glyphs are supposed to have a name access by name is a pretty good alternative
Well in my view name and code point are both valid and useful accesses (and I wouldn't trust names too much). Beside this: xetex has (for non-legacy fonts) primitives for all accesses: by char (unicode), slot and name. luatex hasn't, here the only (primitive) access are commands like \char which expect a number; the name field of a character is marked as "unused" in the manual. Neither has the generic fontloader imho some suitable primitive command for name access. All the examples in the generic folder uses numbers or direct input: e.g. \Uchar"1D49D or \Uradical "0 "221A So it is imho quite natural that people who write code and packages expect the access by \char + code point to work. Why should I bother with a (perhaps font specific) glyph name if I can simply look up a clear code point number in a table? And if I got it right you are reserving a specific space to have stable numbers internally, so you are caring about numbers too ;-)
the main issue is that there are fonts that use private > 0xFFFF space
I don't know. Wikipedia says that code2000 uses plane 15 but I didn't check. -- Ulrike Fischer http://www.troubleshooting-tex.de/