[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       suse-programming-e
Subject:    Re: [suse-programming-e] Xerces XMLCh UTF-16 Linux vs Reality
From:       "Steven T. Hatton" <hattons () globalsymmetry ! com>
Date:       2006-03-09 3:45:38
Message-ID: 200603082245.39000.hattons () globalsymmetry ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wednesday 08 March 2006 01:38, Steven T. Hatton wrote:
> On the Xerces C++ mailing list I was told the following:
>
> "XMLCh is specifically UTF-16. But wchar_t is not UTF-16 everywhere. It's
> non-portable, and Solaris and Linux each use different (including from each
> other) encodings for wchar_t.

Can anybody comment on the truth and/or significance of that statement?  My 
understanding of the C++ Standard is that an implementation is required to 
support the UCS-2 (UTF-16) character set, but may use a different underlying 
encoding.  The implementation should, however, behave 'as if' it were using 
UCS-2 internally.

Perhaps I should press for clarification as to what was intended "It's
non-portable, and Solaris and Linux each use different (including from each
other) encodings for wchar_t."  

I have no doubt that the C++ Standard does not offer a clear and easy to 
follow path for using different character encodings within the same program.  
The support may ultimately be very powerful, but I have found it difficult to 
use.

Steven

-- 
To unsubscribe, email: suse-programming-e-unsubscribe@suse.com
For additional commands, email: suse-programming-e-help@suse.com
Archives can be found at: http://lists.suse.com/archive/suse-programming-e

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]