From: Doug Ewell (dewell@adelphia.net)
Date: Wed Sep 20 2006 - 07:56:05 CDT
Philippe Verdy <verdy underscore p at wanadoo dot fr> wrote:
> Still today, most applications are written with languages that don't
> have native support for the Unicode character model (C/C++ included,
> but also many popular script languages like PHP); if we want to have
> things changed, we would need to promote other languages, but the main
> issue there is in training programmers for these languages; C/C++ is
> still too much popular, even though Java has gained a strong influence
> in lots of domains (notably in enterprise applications), along with
> C#/.Net just following that move.
I don't know who "we" is supposed to be here. The Unicode Consortium
doesn't "promote" programming languages. It may note that some
languages or implementations have better support for Unicode than
others; the page on "Unicode Enabled Products" sort of does this. (That
page includes a C++ library, BTW.)
> Isn't it time to start deprecating C/C++ (keeping it with the assembly
> languages, only for some critical things like device drivers at kernel
> level, or fast performance maths libraries and multimedia codecs) in
> favor of higher-level programming languages (that have native support
> for the Unicode character model) ?
(laughs) Programming languages don't get "deprecated" like last month's
fashions.
-- Doug Ewell Fullerton, California, USA http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ RFC 4645 * UTN #14
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 20 2006 - 08:05:01 CDT