Sean Kelly seems to have a lot to say on this topic, maybee he can help
you write it
-Original Message-
From: Scott Cantor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 7:20 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: XMLCh vs wchar_t
> We asked this last time t
> We asked this last time this conversation went round. No one replied.
I recall the topic, figured it was time to ask again. ;-)
> We would add it if anyone wanted to contribute.
If and when I ever manage to get it written and working, I'll certainly
contribute it.
-- Scott
Hi Scott,
On 6 Oct 2004, at 2:07, Scott Cantor wrote:
Does somebody have one? If so, adding it to the distribution would be
most
welcome.
We asked this last time this conversation went round. No one replied.
We would add it if anyone wanted to contribute.
Gareth
--
Gareth Reakes, Managing Dire
Scott Cantor wrote:
Eh, all that's required is another transcoding jump from XMLCh* to
wstring in the XML code wrappers. Irritating and slow, but
not a major complication.
Well, so, I've been punting for a while on actually building a usable
wrapper that's STL container-friendly. Mostly because
> Technically speaking, it is legal C++, but it's a bit more involved than
> this. You also have to define type traits for XMLCh and then
> deal with the fact that your XMLCh strings won't work with char or
> wchar_t strings, can't be printed via cout or wcout, etc.
Right, I was glossing over d
On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, Scott Cantor wrote:
>
> I'm sure there are good reasons for why the C++ committee didn't mandate
> UCS-2 for wchar_t, but whatever they were, they've gone a long way in
> convincing the XML community to stay with Java and ignore C++. So I hope it
> was worth it. ;-)
Too many pe
On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, Scott Cantor wrote:
>
> > But you are right, Xerces internally uses
> > UTF-16 strings, and wchar_t isn't a cross-platform storage for
> > UTF-16. The point is that platforms that know this is true (like Windows)
> > would like to see XMLCh==wchar_t, even if they can just cast t
> So is there a silver bullet other then type casting to fix this issue ?
If you need portability, the only silver buller is one to the head to avoid
the obnoxious transcoding all over your code. ;-)
Otherwise, I don't know why for Windows they haven't just typedef'd it to
wchar_t, but I suspect
So is there a silver bullet other then type casting to
fix this issue ?
Ryan
--- Scott Cantor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But you are right, Xerces internally uses
> > UTF-16 strings, and wchar_t isn't a cross-platform
> storage for
> > UTF-16. The point is that platforms that know this
> is
> But you are right, Xerces internally uses
> UTF-16 strings, and wchar_t isn't a cross-platform storage for
> UTF-16. The point is that platforms that know this is true (like Windows)
> would like to see XMLCh==wchar_t, even if they can just cast them to be
> the desired type.
I agree. The big a
At 12.58 05/10/2004 -0400, Scott Cantor wrote:
> Because std::wstring is not so standard... for instance, gcc
> 2.95 doesn't have it.
Heh, if that was the reason (as opposed to the fact that the *encoding* of
wstring isn't standard), I'd be screaming for the change. ;-)
I was just pointing out that
Scott Cantor wrote:
>> Because std::wstring is not so standard... for instance, gcc
>> 2.95 doesn't have it.
>
> Heh, if that was the reason (as opposed to the fact that the *encoding* of
> wstring isn't standard), I'd be screaming for the change. ;-)
>
> -- Scott
So, what's the problem with st
> Because std::wstring is not so standard... for instance, gcc
> 2.95 doesn't have it.
Heh, if that was the reason (as opposed to the fact that the *encoding* of
wstring isn't standard), I'd be screaming for the change. ;-)
-- Scott
-
At 00.06 05/10/2004 +0200, Giampiero Gabbiani wrote:
Hi to all,
just a question, why during the development of c version of xerces, a new
'wide' character string has been developed, instead of using the standard
c++ wstring?
Because std::wstring is not so standard... for instance, gcc 2.95 doesn't
, October 04, 2004 6:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: XMLCh vs wchar_t
"c version of xerces" >>>> there was no "wstring" in "c" can there
be anything more obvious than that ???
Or &q
"c version of xerces" there was no "wstring" in "c" can there
be anything more obvious than that ???
Or "wstring" was not a cross-platform construct
-Original Message-
From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Giampiero Gabbiani
Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 3:
16 matches
Mail list logo
