On 10/10/11 01:03, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > The reason is that then MB_CUR_MAX would be inconsistent with the > behavior of mbrlen and similar functions.
Surely it's OK if MB_CUR_MAX is larger than it strictly needs to be. I can't think of any application that would break if MB_CUR_MAX were set to MB_LEN_MAX on ancient hosts that lacked MB_CUR_MAX.
