Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 12:19:19 +0200 From: Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@britannica.bec.de> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SoC 2009: BSD-licensed libiconv in base system Message-ID: <20090428101919.GA552@britannica.bec.de> In-Reply-To: <20090428024246.GA12887@zim.MIT.EDU> References: <aa9f273a8313c6436e76fa9f5d587ef4.squirrel@webmail.kovesdan.org> <20090427183836.GA10793@zim.MIT.EDU> <49F5FE45.2090101@freebsd.org> <20090427193326.GA7654@britannica.bec.de> <20090427194904.GA11137@zim.MIT.EDU> <20090427200821.GA6665@britannica.bec.de> <20090428024246.GA12887@zim.MIT.EDU>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 10:42:46PM -0400, David Schultz wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2009, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 03:49:04PM -0400, David Schultz wrote: > > > ...but isn't this moot at present because there are no > > > widely-accepted encodings that include characters that > > > aren't supported by UCS-4? Citrus doesn't seem to support > > > any such encodings in any case. > > > > "Just" using UCS-4 not necessarily buys you the desired affect. > > Keep in mind that UCS-4 is still a variable width encoding, as soon as > > you factor combining characters and some other interesting parts in. > > This is true, but unfortunately C99 wasn't really designed to > support combining characters. I don't understand how this relates > to the present discussion. The main reason people want to use wchar_t is because they want to use a fixed width presentation of characters. Just using UCS-4 doesn't give you that if you ever want to support Level 2 and higher. It also highlights UCS-4 is not that state independent as it is often thought to be. That is again something undesirable. Joerg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090428101919.GA552>