Duncan:
>> In all of the discussions about the initial level of UTF-8 and
>> Unicode support that would be incorporated into FLTK-1.3.x,
>> surrogate pairs were one of the things that were deliberately
>> excluded. Ironic, no?

Ian:
> Were they? I don't recall that.
> We claim to be able to handle the whole range up to 0x0010FFFF,
> and at least on XFT (and I think Xlib) that was true.
> It was *nearly* true on OSX and not true on Win32.
>
> So I'm only trying to make things consistent.

See "Unicode in FLTK" section http://www.fltk.org/doc-1.3/unicode.html
but it could be that I documented this based on comments in the code,
both FLTK-1.3.x and FLTK-2.x and not just on discussion in the forums.

D.

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

Reply via email to