Unicode "no-op" Character?

[J Decker via Unicode]

On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 5:35 PM David Starner via Unicode <
unicode at unicode.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 10:41 PM Shawn Steele via Unicode
> <unicode at unicode.org> wrote:
>
> IMO, since it's unlikely that anyone expects
> that they can transmit a NUL through an arbitrary channel, unlike a
> random private use character.

You would be wrong.
NUL is a valid codepoint like any other; except like in the C standard
library and descendants.
And, I expect it to be maintained.  And, for the most part is, (except for
emscripten)

>
> --
> Kie ekzistas vivo, ekzistas espero.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20190624/db992a27/attachment.html>