Hi Joseph,
On Thu, 12 Jul 2001, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On 12 Jul 2001, Christoph Rohland wrote:
>
>> I think this documentation describes the feature (not the
>> implementation) sufficiently:
>>
>> http://wwwold.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg20/docs/n830-utf-16-c.txt
>
> It doesn't.
At least it was for the Unicode Consortium.
> Why is it required to be 16-bit rather than just at least 16-bit?
Because of the need of a good compromise (and IMO it is a compromise)
between memory and cpu requirements for long-lived, string intensive
applications. This is explained in the document.
> GCC supports c4x with 32-bit chars, and support for pdp10 with 9-bit
> chars is being worked on. For C++, is utf16_t special like wchar_t,
> or a typedef? Are the strings NUL-terminated? In C++, is there a
> deprecated conversion to a pointer to a non-const-qualified type?
> What arrays can be initialised from these strings? Do they
> concatenate with each other; with narrow strings; with wide strings;
> and what sort of strings result? Is the quiet change to
> interpretation of programs in which u is a macro and is immediately
> followed by a string literal justified, or should the specification
> use a macro defined in a header to form these string literals?
> (Some proposals of the latter form - a macro defined in a header -
> were being discussed on the WG14 reflector at the point I
> subscribed.)
I see, there is a lot of room for discussion (and as I said I am not
the expert on language or Unicode internals). But I would like to
invite these experts to discuss these issues without prejudice.
Greetings
Christoph
-
Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
