In Thu, 11 Jun 2020 08:47:09 +0200 Laslo Hunhold <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 11:42:40 +0500 > Nikita Zlobin <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear Nikita, > > > One more reason to propose utf. I have read this to better > > understand Xft: https://keithp.com/~keithp/talks/xtc2001/paper > > > > It mentions, that Xft requires unicode. Not sure, what unicode type > > is meant, but at least Xft manual hs Utf(x) suffixed functions, > > though no with Ucs(x). > > exactly, UTF-8 should be everywhere. There are other complexities in > program and it's a myth to me why people are still trying to keep the > encoding space heterogenous. I know there are legacy applications and > file formats, but that shouldn't be our worry. > > With best regards > > Laslo > Thanks. Meanwhile I found more uses for Xmb* stuff, whose change would two of my patches. Not completely sure if mb->utf8 conveersion is necessary for any xprop-related code. One pro for this - same function instead of two, yet utf8 is ascii compatible. Well if there were no mb at all, I would think more than once in case of gettextprop.
