On 07.09.2005 04:42, Reed Hedges wrote:
> Right, sorry, when I say Unicode, I mean something we choose (one) that
> is the most-inclusive of all character sets/languages. Such an
> all-inclusive encoding would likely be a multibyte encoding, I presume.
Yeah... IIRC you have up to 2^21 characters
Lalo Martins wrote:
> Oooh, interesting thought. Would types and contextual names be allowed
> to be unicode too?
Probably not,
It would be nice I guess, but I don't think it's at all neccesary. Plus,
then URLs would be potentially multibyte or otherwise in obscure
encodings and that would caus
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hmm, well I'll have to try it again, then. I don't remember what the
specific problem was, although I seem to recall at the time (this being
over a year ago) Jorrit warning me away from Unicode and CS on Win32.
On Tue, 6 Sep 2005, res wrote:
On
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 6 Sep 2005, Reed Hedges wrote:
Why use wxConvCurrent instead of wxConvUTF8? I got the impression from
the wx docs that wxConvCurrent depends on the (GUI) platform, so on a
unicode platform you'd be telling it your strings from VOS were unic
