Re: Java/Unicode brain damage

[Joel Rees <rees@server.mediafusion.co.jp>]

David Brownell commented:


> > <interesting-thought>If you really want to work internally in UTF-16 or
> > UTF-32 in C, get yourself a processor with a 16- or 32-bit byte and a
> > Standard C for it
>
> Actually, I'd expect the "wchar_t" type to be either 16 bits (most
machines)
> or 32 bits (many SVr4 derived distributions) ... and there are standard
> libraries to work with "wchar" strings.

I have experience with compilers that implement wchar_t as 8 bits. (Yes, 8.
the standard allows it. I suppose they figured they had other priorities, or
they couldn't find somebody who knew how to implement enough of truly wide
wchar_t libraries to make it worthwhile. I should have volunteered?)

I have seen advice to avoid using wchar_t for Unicode, because of the wide
array of interpretations on what it should mean and the poor implementations
of locales.

And Microsoft has also avoided wchar_t. (Wait. Let me think a little more
about the implications of that, . . .  .)

Joel Rees
programmer -- rees@mediafusion.co.jp
----------------------------------------------------
To be a tree supporting all information,
  giving root to the chaos
    and branches to the trivia,
      information breathing anew --
        This is the aim of Yggdrasill.
============================XML as Best Solution===
Media Fusion Co. ,Ltd.  株式会社メディアフュージョン
Amagasaki  TEL 81-6-6415-2560    FAX 81-6-6415-2556
    Tokyo　TEL 81-3-3516-2566  　FAX 81-3-3516-2567
                       http://www.mediafusion.co.jp
===================================================