On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 2:30 AM, Stephan Bergmann <sberg...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 02/13/2016 04:21 PM, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: >> >> On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 6:17 AM, Khaled Hosny <khaledho...@eglug.org> >> wrote: >>> >>> I count only ~7000 usages across the code base, so that is not such a >>> huge task. >> >> Internally it is doable, externally that is more of a problem, since >> sal_Unicode is part of the stable external API. >> The best you can do is to have an internal 'alias' for it. > > > Or the worst, considering that you then confusingly have two names for the > same concept.
are you confused by uint<n>_t typedef ? they all 'alias' existing type. > Trying to encode semantic differences (like between sal_utf16be and > sal_utf16le) requires discipline indeed >and when it starts to go sour it's probably worse than not trying to make the >distinction in the type system in the first place yeah, I mentioned the le/be variant to be 'complete', I will certainly concede that it would likely be overkill. still having sal_utf16. sal_utf32 and even sal_utf8 would not hurt, especailly comapred to sal_Int32, sal_Unicode, sal_Char respectively Norbert _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
