On Wed, Apr 26, 2000 at 10:59:20AM +0800, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> Dimitrie O. Paun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [...]
> >I think we should be a lot more agnostic about the string encoding. What I
> >mean is that we should have only one function that works with all encodings,
> >which takes as the first argument the encoding used by the other strings
> >passed in as arguments:
> ...
>
> Yes, Wine should have only one functional implementation indeed.
> I think, it should be implemented like in NT: all actual work does
> Unicode version, ANSI version simply converts ANSI to Unicode and
> then calls Unicode work horse. But this transition will consume
> a lot of time and efforts, because currently Wine does all work
> in reverse order.
The reason it is done in reverse order is because it is currently simpler
to handle strings and the like that way.
But there is nothing stopping a slow migration from W->A conversions into
A->W conversions everywhere.
But ... I think we all would appreciate it, if the code would stay readable
and not get lots of if()s and the like.
Ciao, Marcus
