On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 11:35:17 +0200 Michael Schnell <mschn...@lumino.de> wrote:
> On 08/22/2012 10:56 AM, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > > The UTF-8 optimized functions needs UTF-16 versions. But why do you > > mean it needs a "really thorough rework"? > Guesswork :-) > > The LCL itself already has some widgetsets using UTF-16. > Yep. So there the conversion needs to be dropped, while with the other a > conversion needs to be implemented. > Thus Lazarus would get "compatible" with MSEGUI on that behalf. Using the same string type is far from "compatible". > > Strings speed is almost no issue for the LCL itself. > I do believe that you are right here (Martin very often offered this > argument when explaining why he built MSEGUI the way it is. I never saw Martin saying that he chose Widestring/Unicodestring because speed does not matter. AFAIK he choose widestring, because UCS2 is simpler than UTF-8 and was completely sufficient for all his projects. > > But many LCL applications and packages would suffer. > Same issue as when Delphi made this move. It is not the same. Delphi moved from Windows CP to Unicode. That is a necessary step the LCL has already taken years ago. Now the RTL+FCL is moving to Unicode, which is necessary too. The LCL is just one package from many that needs to adapt. Mattias _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
