Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"?

daxim has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? by haukex (Archbishop) on Nov 22, 2017 at 12:46 UTC
I'm not sure what you mean with "n/t", but to answer the question in the title, Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? A bisect points to f0175764f, "Make charnames more robust". I assume the change in that commit that is making the difference is charnames being switched over to using Unicode::UCD to resolve the codes. That commit was first in Perl v5.7.3, or release v5.8.0 (July 2002).	[reply]
Re: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Nov 22, 2017 at 15:47 UTC
This is for the negative reaction givers, not the OP. What exactly does the OP need that isn't there? The question is clear if terse. "n/t" seems to be "no text." In a field where `<EOM>` is something of an idiom, a subject only question doesn't seem odd to me at all.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^2: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? by Anonymous Monk on Nov 22, 2017 at 20:34 UTC
There is always something to add. For example, what (versions) did I try? Might help someone with bisecting. In any case, good nodes are edited and well-formed. Would you write an essay that has text in the title, n/t in the body? ^#1 #1 But apparently, some people write footnotes that are longer than the article. And if I recall correctly, there was a full volume (a book) that served as a single footnote... So YMMV?	[reply]
Re^3: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Nov 22, 2017 at 20:51 UTC
The question really is, would you write an essay to ask the temperature? It is a simple, self-contained question that enriches the monastery by being asked and answered and comparing it to anything more complex or problematic is fallacious. It's surreal to me that anyone, let alone a few anyones, has an issue with the brevity of the post from a known good monk or that one would insist on verbosity as a social benefit as opposed to RFC:Repetitive Verbosity Considered Harmful.	[reply]
Re^4: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? by Anonymous Monk on Nov 22, 2017 at 21:05 UTC
Re^2: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Nov 22, 2017 at 17:13 UTC
There should still be a post even if it's the same as the title.	[reply]
Re^3: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Nov 22, 2017 at 17:38 UTC
Why? As I see it, it would add nothing and would effectively be anti-DRY. I appreciate terseness where appropriate and I don't understand the negative reaction here.	[reply]
Re^4: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? -- good habits by Discipulus (Canon) on Nov 22, 2017 at 18:58 UTC
Re^5: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? -- good habits by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Nov 22, 2017 at 19:18 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re^5: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? -- good habits by LanX (Saint) on Nov 23, 2017 at 15:06 UTC
Re^4: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Nov 22, 2017 at 19:20 UTC
Re^5: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" ruffle feathers? by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Nov 22, 2017 at 20:00 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re^5: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Nov 22, 2017 at 19:44 UTC
Context , doc-link & what he tried by LanX (Saint) on Nov 23, 2017 at 07:25 UTC
n/t	[reply]
Re: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? by Anonymous Monk on Nov 22, 2017 at 12:37 UTC
Let perldeltas or ppixregexplain (maybe) or perlver (for sure) tell you	[reply]
Re: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? by LanX (Saint) on Nov 22, 2017 at 12:44 UTC
How do I post a question effectively? How do I compose an effective node title?	[reply]
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.


XP is just a number
	PerlMonks