On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 06:05:05PM +0200, Lukas Tribus wrote: > So if I understand correctly it *does* work if the configuration contains > the (multibyte) character as-is, the only problem is that we can not > represent it in the configuration in an escaped form like \xE4B888? > > Is that what you mean?
Yes exactly. And we have no way to extend the current syntax without a risk of breaking some existing usages since backslashes currently escape very few things and have their own meaning. Hmmm wait a minute. I should read my code from time to time, because cfgparse.c tells me I'm wrong. \x is already supported and has been since day one (commit already 1.0.0 contained it). Shame on me. So yes it's possible to write unicode chars. Your example would simply be \xe4\xb8\x88. Thanks for the question :-) Willy
