Philippe Verdy wrote:
> I have not
> found a solution to this problem, and I don't know if such
> solution even
> exists; if such solution exists, it should be quite complex...).
I think it should be possible to mathematically prove that it doesn't exist.
So, I claim you cannot achive NOT-UTF-8 => UTF-16 => NOT-UTF-8 and UTF-16 => NOT-UTF-8 => UTF-16 at the same time. But this is not really needed, since nothing of this affects any UTF trip (and none of the above is one).
And, the funny thing is - currently NOT2-UTF-16 => NOT2-UTF-8 => NOT2-UTF-16 *is* possible (NOT2, because it is not the same conversion, it is actually UCS2 conversion). But there is no need for it. NOT-UTF-8 => UTF-16 => NOT-UTF-8 is THE most valuable one. Outside of Unicode that is. Unicode could acknowledge that fact and yield 128 codepoints.
Lars
