At 02:51 PM 4/23/2003, David Abrahams wrote: >"Edward Diener" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> I still feel that a fixed width Unicode encoding has to be an advance >over >> variable width encodings like MBCS for any character set. > >I guess that depends on how important random access over the >characters of a string is to you. To me, it seems like an edge case.
It really doesn't matter what we think - both fixed-width and variable-width encodings are well established, and not going to go away anytime soon. So a filesystem library is going to have to cope with both fixed and variable width external encodings of filenames.
--Beman
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
