Hi Eike, In message "Re: [porting-dev] MinGW port and ICU patches", Eike Rathke wrote... >Hi Takashi, > >On Sunday, 2008-04-06 21:55:06 +0900, Takashi Ono wrote: > >> I am responsible for MinGW port. I think it is difficult to get rid of >> patches >> because of unicode handlings. >> >> In ooo sources, unicode characters are represented by sal_Unicode and it is >> typedef'ed to unsigned short. In the meantime in MinGW environment, >> wchart_t is an >> built-in type of 16 bit unsigned integer type but is incompatible with >> unsigned >> short. > >How is sal_Unicode related to ICU? ICU doesn't use sal_Unicode. >
With the configure script that comes with icu distribution, icu prefer using wchar_t to represent unicode with wchar_t if wchar_t is available and is a 16 bit integer type. So the pointer to UChar is not compatible with sal_Unicode unless we do not use reinterpret_cast's >> As Windows APIs require wchar_t, There are so many static_cast's here and >> there and >> therefore I prefer patch to let icu to handle unicode by using unsigned >> short even if >> there exists usable wchar_t not to have more static_cast's. > >static_cast where? In ICU? According to >http://source.icu-project.org/repos/icu/icu/tags/release-3-8-1/readme.html#HowToBuildSupported >MinGW is supported but rarely tested. Patches necessary to make it build >should be upstreamed. > It is buildable with MinGW tools but we have to use reinterpret_cast whereever we assign a pointer to UChar to a pointer to sal_Unicode. >If patches to ICU are necessary because of how OOo uses it, we should >find another solution than patching ICU. > >Patches are lost respectively would had to be reapplied by the port >maintainer (you ;-) whenever we upgraded to a newer version of ICU, >which IMHO is unnecessary time consuming work. > >> Other patches to cope with strange behaviour of recent versions of cygwin >> tools as >> workarounds, > >These may be worth upstreaming, if it isn't just because cygwin is >buggy. > Some people may think they are bugs but they may be worth upstreaming. >> and make dll's to have similar names to MSVC build are also included. > >Those of course wouldn't make it upstream. Is that really needed? >Shouldn't it be better addressed in solenv/inc/libs.mk and packaging? > It is possible but we have to have many conditionals there and some OOo developpers may not like it. I have had a comment that the commenter likes to have even less. >> Anyways IMHO most of the patches for MinGW port are quite local and have to >> be >> reviewed before being proposed to upstream. > >Please add details to >http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/ICU/bugs_and_patches#MinGW_platform >and for the patches that should go upstream please file an ICU bug at >http://bugs.icu-project.org/trac/ and add the ticket number to the wiki >similar to the other patches mentioned there, so we can track progress. > I will do so when I have time. >Thanks > Eike > >-- > OOo/SO Calc core developer. Number formatter stricken i18n transpositionizer. > SunSign 0x87F8D412 : 2F58 5236 DB02 F335 8304 7D6C 65C9 F9B5 87F8 D412 > OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS > Please don't send personal mail to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] account, which I > use for > mailing lists only and don't read from outside Sun. Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Thanks. >______________________________________________________________________ >Content-Type: application/pgp-signature >Content-Disposition: inline > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) > >iD8DBQFH/gOfZcn5tYf41BIRArKHAJ4hieUQDUPe8eUAfInF6hGeiWHOaQCfZWm+ >I+yFCTfD3cLx/cm1qUMhhxM= >=3olr >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ---- Takashi Ono(HK Freak) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Personal Address, checked every morning/evening and holidays) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Address for business, checked every working days) http://www.hkfreak.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
