--- Tomas Frydrych <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On further thought, I will do away with the > UT_UCSChar type, > replacing it instead with UT_UCS2Char and > UT_UCS4Char (and > corresponding UT_UCS2_ and UT_UCS4_ string > functions). This > will be clearer.
When are we ever going to need a UT_UCS2Char or a UT_UCS2String? We'll only need UCS-2 for interaction with Windows or some importing and exporting. In those cases we'll just need to iconv into a buffer - not a full string class. It'll also be confusing and people will wonder which one to use. Andrew Dunbar. > Tomas ===== http://linguaphile.sourceforge.net http://www.abisource.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com
