Jungshik Shin
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jungshik Shin
> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 7:46 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Encoding conversions
>
>
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Carl W. Brown wrote:
>
> > > > wchar_t is a very wrong thing to normalize to, because it is OS and
> > > > locale dependent.
> >
> > I know that it is OS dependent but how is it locale dependent?
>
> At least under Solaris, it's locale-dependent. I don't know
> the details, but it seems like somehow Sun engineers found that it's
> better that way (in terms of efficiency or some other metrics....).
> There's nothing wrong with wchar_t depending on locale and vendors are
> free to implement it the way they want because no standard stipulates
> that it be uniform across locales. However, as Juliusz wrote, this
> dependency on locales (as well as on OS) makes wchar_t pretty much
> useless.
I don't know of any Solaris wchar_t implementation that uses Unicode so the
fact that it varies by locale probably does not apply anyway. Apparently
they decides that they wanted a 16 bit code page so that they could have
fixed width encodings. You are probably right that they have one for
Japanese, Korean, one or two Chinese etc. So far I have managed to avoid
them.
Carl
-
Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
