On 24.10.2010, at 16:33, Duncan Gibson wrote:

> /* second attempt: this time in fltk.development */
> 
> It seems to me that some of the goals of fltk-1.3.x have already been
> reached, namely printing support, a Table widget, and doxygen docs.
> The last major issue is UTF-8, which dominates the 1.3 Roadmap.
> 
> Can we split UTF-8 support down into slices, and aim for those?
> To see whether this even makes sense, I would propose having a new
> poll question along the lines of:
> 
> What level of character support do you require from FLTK in the future?
> 1. plain ASCII only, so UTF-8 support needed
> 2. ASCII plus Western accented characters
> 3. simple left-to-right character sets (Greek, Cyrillic...)
> 4. simple right-to-left character sets (Arabic, Hebrew...)
> 5. complex character sets (Chinese, Japanese, Korean...)

We are beyond 1. and 2. already. 3. is the minimum we must do in UTF8, but 4. 
should be the goal IMHO. I don't know enough to ever solve 5. as a whole.

I would like to suggest a mode of action to get UTF8 support complete. My main 
issue is not knowing where to start and which places in the source code were 
already touched. We agreed a long time ago to not introduce a new string type, 
so here is what we could do:

Any parameter that should take a text string should contain utf8 in its name. 
For example, once we change 

  Fl_Widget(int x, int y, int w, int h, const char *label) 

and *all* functions that depend on it, we can change the footprint to

  Fl_Widget(int x, int y, int w, int h, const char *label_utf8) 

This does not cover return types obviously. This would only be visible in 
doxygen docs.

How about that?

 - Matthias

_______________________________________________
fltk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev

Reply via email to