Brendan Murray/DUB/Lotus wrote:
> "A. Vine" <email@example.com> wrote
> > Unix wide characters are 32-bit, and the charset/encoding
> > scheme they contain depends on the locale you're working in.
> I think you're confusing the abstract concept of wide characters
> which are always Unicode, and the local platform's encoding or
> definition of wchar_t. The latter is *usually* 32 bits, but not
> always - sometimes it's 16 and sometimes it's 64. And I wouldn't
> be surprised if some platforms defined it as 8.
Take a look at:
Do a find on "wide character". In Unix terms, wide character does not mean
Unicode *unless you're working in a Unicode locale*. This is a mistake I've
seen made by more than a few folks.
I don't know that "the abstract concept of wide characters" is Unicode.
Certainly the Microsoft concept of wide characters is Unicode. For folks
writing to this list, I expect the platform definitions of wide character are
more important anyway.
-- Andrea Vine, firstname.lastname@example.org, iPlanet i18n architect Guilty feet have got no rhythm. -- George Michael
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:00 EDT