On 2/22/11 3:14 AM, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll wrote: > > I am not going to move ECL from its current single-word (16 or 32 bit) > encoding right now. It would be too much of a hassle. I am just > offering the possibility of having a compromise for devices and > platforms that do not care much about the full character set -- OS X > or Windows, they only support 16-bit characters in their libraries AFAIK. > I believe they use utf-16, so it's not really "just" a 16-bit character.
I think the best answer to your question would be to ask who actually needs to access characters outside the basic multilingual plane of 16 bits. If there are none, then 16 bits is fine. If there are some, then you can decide whether you want to make strings utf-16 or not, or whether they can live with the 32-bit character type. Ray ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Free Software Download: Index, Search & Analyze Logs and other IT data in Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Ecls-list mailing list Ecls-list@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ecls-list
