On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Igor Tandetnik <igor at tandetnik.org> wrote: > On 2/12/2016 10:14 PM, J Decker wrote: >> >> mbstowcs( out, utf8, 5 ); > > > mbstowcs expects the string in the codepage of the current locale - which is > never UTF-8. > >> for( n = 0; n < 5; n++ ) >> printf( "%04x ", out[n] ); // output is 00f0 0090 0080 0081; expect d800 >> dc01 > > > Why do you expect that? It appears your system uses Western European > codepage (aka Latin-1). You pass a character "\xf0" which, when taken to be > encoded in that codepage, is quite properly converted to U+00F0. > >> for( n = 0; n < 5; n++ ) >> printf( "%02x ", chout[n] ); // output is 00 00 00 00 > > > U+10001 is (unsurprisingly) not representable in your current ANSI codepage, > so wcstombs call fails (I can't help but notice that you aren't checking any > calls for failure) and leaves the output buffer unchanged. > >> so it does no useful conversion either way :) > > > It performs the conversion it is documented to perform. It indeed doesn't > perform the conversion that you, for reasons unclear, expect it to perform. > In other words, you engage in wishful thinking, and then blame the messenger > for failure of your wishes to materialize.
I expect it to take any string such as ??????? or ????? ???? ??? ????? ???? and give me a char * representation of it that's useful... or conversely take the char* version of said strings and give me wchar_t * that makes can be used. > -- > Igor Tandetnik > > > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > sqlite-users at mailinglists.sqlite.org > http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
