On Wednesday 19 October 2011 22.05:09 Vincent Snijders wrote: > 2011/10/19 Michael Van Canneyt <[email protected]>: > > On Wed, 19 Oct 2011, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote: > >> On 10/19/11, Vincent Snijders <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> I guess Felipe gave up waiting on a Unicode RTL for the time being and > >>> goes for a full UTF8 pseudo RTL in LazUtils. > >> > >> But this does not mean that LazUtils would not be useful then. My > >> proposals to add UTF-8 routines to the RTL and even FCL were rejected, > > > > Correction: Your proposals were not rejected. > > Thanks for the clarification. > > > No decision as to which character sets will be used in the basic RTL has > > been taken. Any action you take now is therefor premature. > > > > So it was suggested you would wait till things settle down till and the > > final shape of things are more clear. > > That is why I said: "gave up waiting" > I think it would have been better if Lazarus had made an RTL optimized for Lazarus long time ago. Now the FPC team destroyed a stable product in favor of Delphi string compatibility. The introduction of multi-encoding strings is not a really good idea IMHO but more a marketing gag. It seems that the Delphi architects are not absolutely happy with it either. Allan Bauer in: " https://forums.codegear.com/message.jspa?messageID=400258#400258 " " We have way, way too many different string types. It's confusing. " There are more interesting statements in that thread, ex.: " https://forums.codegear.com/message.jspa?messageID=399964#399964 " It is even possible that Delphi strings change again...
Martin -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
