Michael Schnell schrieb: > >> Nobody talks in this case about UTF-8. Even *ANSIstrings* in there >> native meaning can contain multi byte chars, there are *multi byte* ansi >> char sets. > If there is a widely used multi-byte ANSI encoding, why so we need > Unicode ? > > IMHO the introduction of Unicode has been necessary as (like you > suggested) multi-byte ANSI encoding was commonly ignored nearly > completely and there never has been _compiler_ support for them.
So, really? What is not supported? > Thus > IMHO it's quite appropriate to only call "ANSI" only the 1-Byte ANSI > code versions ... tell this 1+ Billion (Billion=10^9 in this case) people in China. > (to be able to tell them technically from Unicode, the > compiler support of which is discussed right here). _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel