I was wondering if anyone knows how to get around the encoding of IO::Socket::Async, particularly the draw-backs described by this:
For example, if the UTF-8 encoding is being used and the last byte in the packet decoded to "a", this would not be emitted since the next packet may include a combining character that should form a single grapheme together. Control characters (such as \n) always serve as grapheme boundaries, so any text-based protocols that use newlines or null bytes as terminators will not need special consideration.
This is currently causing my sockets to omit the last character on messages, but I am not sure how to work around this. I tried to convert the Connection to a Channel then just feed a dumby \n into it, simulating end of input for the message, but that did not work. How can I work around this quirk in UTF-8 encoding?
Here is the MVP to reproduce this:
sub listen(Int $port) {
react {
whenever IO::Socket::Async.listen('0.0.0.0', $port) -> $connection {
whenever $connection.Supply -> $data {
say $data;
$connection.print: $data;
}
}
}
}
listen(9999);
Now if you hit port 9999 on your local machine with any data that does not end with \n you will see that the last byte is ignored.
It's not a "drawback"; it's just Raku reflecting how Unicode works. If you know you only need to handle ASCII or Latin-1, then specify that:
whenever $connection.Supply(:enc<ascii>) -> $data { # or :enc<latin-1>
...
}
If wanting to handle Unicode text, then it's necessary to deal with that fact that receiving, for example, the codepoint for the letter "a", does not give enough information to pass along a complete character, since the next codepoint received in the next packet might be a combining character, such as an acute accent to be placed on the "a". Note that a Raku Str is a character-level data structure (in other languages, strings are often bytes or codepoints, which creates different problems that are largely invisible to those only caring about English text!)
Any well-designed network protocol will provide a way to know when the end of the text content has been reached. Some protocols, such as HTTP, explicitly specify the byte length of the content, thus one can work a the byte level (:bin) and decode the result after seeing that many bytes. Others might use connection close or line breaks.
In conclusion, the string semantics or IO::Socket::Async (and elsewhere in Raku) aren't themselves a problem, but they may show up design problems in protocols.
Related
I saw many resources about the usages of base64 in today's internet. As I understand it, all of those resources seem to spell out single usecase in different ways : Encode binary data in Base64 to avoid getting it misinterpreted/corrupted as something else during transit (by intermediate systems). But I found nothing that explains following :
Why would binary data be corrupted by intermediate systems? If I am sending an image from a server to client, any intermediate servers/systems/routers will simply forward data to next appropriate servers/systems/routers in the path to client. Why would intermediate servers/systems/routers need to interpret something that it receives? Any example of such systems which may corrupt/wrongly interpret data that it receives, in today's internet?
Why do we fear only binary data to be corrupted. We use Base64 because we are sure that those 64 characters can never be corrupted/misinterpreted. But by this same logic, any text characters that do not belong to base64 characters can be corrupted/misinterpreted. Why then, base64 is use only to encode binary data? Extending the same idea, when we use browser are javascript and HTML files transferred in base64 form?
There's two reasons why Base64 is used:
systems that are not 8-bit clean. This stems from "the before time" where some systems took ASCII seriously and only ever considered (and transferred) 7bits out of any 8bit byte (since ASCII uses only 7 bits, that would be "fine", as long as all content was actually ASCII).
systems that are 8-bit clean, but try to decode the data using a specific encoding (i.e. they assume it's well-formed text).
Both of these would have similar effects when transferring binary (i.e. non-text) data over it: they would try to interpret the binary data as textual data in a character encoding that obviously doesn't make sense (since there is no character encoding in binary data) and as a consequence modify the data in an un-fixable way.
Base64 solves both of these in a fairly neat way: it maps all possible binary data streams into valid ASCII text: the 8th bit is never set on Base64-encoded data, because only regular old ASCII characters are used.
This pretty much solves the second problem as well, since most commonly used character encodings (with the notable exception of UTF-16 and UCS-2, among a few lesser-used ones) are ASCII compatible, which means: all valid ASCII streams happen to also be valid streams in most common encodings and represent the same characters (examples of these encodings are the ISO-8859-* family, UTF-8 and most Windows codepages).
As to your second question, the answer is two-fold:
textual data often comes with some kind of meta-data (either a HTTP header or a meta-tag inside the data) that describes the encoding to be used to interpret it. Systems built to handle this kind of data understand and either tolerate or interpret those tags.
in some cases (notably for mail transport) we do have to use various encoding techniques to ensure text doesn't get mangles. This might be the use of quoted-printable encoding or sometimes even wrapping text data in Base64.
Last but not least: Base64 has a serious drawback and that's that it's inefficient. For every 3 bytes of data to encode, it produces 4 bytes of output, thus increasing the size of the data by ~33%. That's why it should be avoided when it's not necessary.
One of the use of BASE64 is to send email.
Mail servers used a terminal to transmit data. It was common also to have translation, e.g. \c\r into a single \n and the contrary. Note: Also there where no guarantee that 8-bit can be used (email standard is old, and it allowed also non "internet" email, so with ! instead of #). Also systems may not be fully ASCII.
Also \n\n. is considered as end of body, and mboxes uses also \n>From to mark start of new mail, so also when 8-bit flag was common in mail servers, the problems were not totally solved.
BASE64 was a good way to remove all problems: the content is just send as characters that all servers must know, and the problem of encoding/decoding requires just sender and receiver agreement (and right programs), without worrying of the many relay server in between. Note: all \c, \r, \n etc. are just ignored.
Note: you can use BASE64 also to encode strings in URL, without worrying about the interpretation of webbrowsers. You may see BASE64 also in configuration files (e.g. to include icons): special crafted images may not be interpreted as configuration. Just BASE64 is handy to encode binary data into protocols which were not designed for binary data.
I have a text file that looks like this:
shooting-stars 💫 "are cool"
I have a lexical analyzer that uses FileInputStream to read the characters one at a time, passing those characters to a switch statement that returns the corresponding lexeme.
In this case, 💫 represents assignment so this case passes:
case 'ð' :
return new Lexeme("ASSIGN");
For some reason, the file reader stops at that point, returning a null pointer even though it has yet to process the string (or whatever is after the 💫). Any time it reads in an emoticon it does this. If there were no emoticons, it gets to the end of file. Any ideas?
I suspect the problem is that the character 💫 (Unicode code point U+1F4AB) is outside the range of characters that Java represents internally as single char values. Instead, Java represents characters above U+FFFF as two characters known as surrogate pairs, in this case U+D83D followed by U+DCAB. (See this thread for more info and some links.)
It's hard to know exactly what's going on with the little bit of code that you presented, but my guess is that you are not handling this situation correctly. You will need to adjust your processing logic to deal with your emoticons arriving in two pieces.
I'm curious about the way that in the past it was implemented and I want to get information about how can I implement a character set of my own.
ASCII (American Standard Code for Information Interchange) was the "original" characterset, and remains the basis for most text data. ASCII is actually a 7-bit code (the numeric values range from 0 to 127) with the most significant bit of a byte indicating if the rest of the byte refers to ASCII (if zero) or the current Codepage.
Extra (non-ascii) characters were then added to these codepages, and the user's computer would load a specific codepage to use. Unfortunately this meant that you needed to load the correct codepage before viewing a file or the wrong characters would appear.
We have now moved on, and most systems use Unicode which is a variable character length (rather than the single-byte characters used previously) which can contain thousands upon thousands of characters, allowing for a single encoding to cater for what would have been multiple codepages using the ASCII+Codepage method of old.
That's the brief history; As to how to create your own characterset, I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve - You can create your own fonts, but if you're talking about an actual characterset (i.e. characters that do not already exist) then you'll have to get your characterset added to a standard such as Unicode so that other computers can make use of your new characters, which would be a considerable amount of work (and I have no idea how you'd even go about it) -- It's worth considering, however, that almost every character in existence already exists in Unicode so you may want to review what's already been done before you try and take on a mammoth undertaking such as creating an entirely new characterset.
I'm having a little trouble getting erlang to give me a unicode string.
Here's what works:
io:format("~ts~n", [<<226,132,162>>]).
â„¢
ok
But instead of printing to the console, I want to assign it to a variable. So I thought:
T = lists:flatten(io_lib:format("~ts~n", [<<226,132,162>>])).
T.
[8482,10]
How can I get T in the io_lib example to contain the â„¢ symbol so I can write it to a network stream?
Instead of assigning the flattened version to a variable for sending on the network, can you instead re-write your code that sends over the network to accept the binary in the first place and use the formatted write mechanism ~ts when sending over the socket?
That would also let you avoid the lists:flatten, which isn't needed for the built-in IO mechanisms.
It does contain the trademark symbol: as you can see here, 8482 is its code. It isn't printed as â„¢ in the shell, because the shell prints as strings only lists which contain printable character code in Latin-1. So [8482, 10] is a Unicode string (in UTF-32 encoding). If you want to convert it to a different encoding, use the unicode module.
First thing is knowing what you need to do. Then you can adapt your code the best way you find.
Erlang represents unicode strings as lists of codepoints. Unicode codepoints are integers, not bytes. Snce you can only send bytes over the network, things like unicode strings, need to be encoded in byte squences by the sending side and decoded by the receiving side. UTF-8 is the most used encoding for unicode strings, and that's what your binary is, the UTF-8 encoding of the unicode string composed by the codepoint 8482.
What you get out of the io_lib:format call is the erlang string representation of that codepoint plus the new line character.
A very reasonable way to send unicode strings over the network is encoding them in UTF-8. Don't use io_lib:format for that, though. unicode:characters_to_binary/1 is the function meant to transform unicode strings in UTF-8 encoded binaries.
In the receiving side (and probably even better in your whole application) you'll have to decide how you will handle the strings, either in encoded binaries (or lists) or in plain unicode lists. But over the network the only choice is using binaries (or iolists wich are possibly deep lists of bytes) and I'll bet the most reasonable encoding for your application will be UTF-8.
I want to detect and replace malformed UTF-8 characters with blank space using a Perl script while loading the data using SQL*Loader. How can I do this?
Consider Python. It allows to extend codecs with user-defined error handlers, so you can replace undecodable bytes with anything you want.
import codecs
codecs.register_error('spacer', lambda ex: (u' ', ex.start + 1))
s = 'spam\xb0\xc0eggs\xd0bacon'.decode('utf8', 'spacer')
print s.encode('utf8')
This prints:
spam eggs bacon
EDIT: (Removed bit about SQL Loader as it seems to no longer be relevant.)
One problem is going to be working out what counts as the "end" of a malformed UTF-8 character. It's easy to say what's illegal, but it may not be obvious where the next legal character starts.
RFC 3629 describes the structure of UTF-8 characters. If you take a look at that, you'll see that it's pretty straightforward to find invalid characters, AND that the next character boundary is always easy to find (it's a character < 128, or one of the "long character" start markers, with leading bits of 110, 1110, or 11110).
But BKB is probably correct - the easiest answer is to let perl do it for you, although I'm not sure what Perl does when it detects the incorrect utf-8 with that filter in effect.