On 17/05/18 23:26, Pádraig Brady wrote: > p.s. I'm slightly worried that the _existing_ fast path processing > for the is_basic() set, may be too big a set for mbrtowc() avoidance > for GB18030 for example?
Actually that existing optimization should be fine as we're checking we're not in a shift state first. cheers, Pádraig
