Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote: >> Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote: >> >>> Great idea ... but not what the gcc documentation says ... how would we >>> enforce it on our users? >>> The gcc documentation says the source characterset is (by default) whatever >>> the current locale says it is (or UTF-8 if the compiler can't determine it >>> from the locale) ... unless overridden by the -finput-charset= command >>> line option. The check sees if the compiler is performing according to >>> those rules (in which case no command line options are needed), or if the >>> compiler supports the options to specify the charactersets (in which case >>> we use those options). If you don't want the check (either you don't have >>> any non-ascii literals, or you are sure your compiler will be generating >>> UTF-8 output) you can disable it. >> >> I guess I must be a bit dumb as I don't get the point you are trying to >> achieve with your configure check. >> It looks like you want to allow people to work in a, say, Latin-2 >> environment, but compile their documents as if they were using the UTF-8 >> encoding? > > No .. the idea is to let them work in whatever environment they like (latin-2 > is a perfectly good example), but have the *binary* they produce contain > UTF-8 encoded strings so that the running executable will display the correct > characters.
In that case I don't understand why you want to add -finput-charset=UTF-8 to the compiler options. This flag changes the interpretation of the *source* file. In fact, I'd say if the compiler ever succeeds compiling the test example with -finput-charset=UTF-8 then the compiler either ignores the option altogether or it is broken since the ISO-Latin 1 pound character is an invalid character in a UTF-8 encoded file. Wolfgang _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
