Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2002/11/28/11:51:25
Hello.
Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, Richard Dawe wrote:
>
> > Anyway, I was looking at implementing the wctype and wctrans functions.
>
> Thanks. Please consider discussing the design here. The issue of wide
> character support is a huge one, and it's easy to try to come up with
> an ambitious design for which we'll never have enough resources. For
> example, the glibc implementation is one direction which we should NOT
> choose, IMHO.
Er, I haven't actually got a design. I was just try to integrate Mark E.'s
wide-character work and code up the "easy" functions that are independent of
the meaning of wchar_t. I was going to look at the other stuff later. Has
anyone got any good bookmarks for web pages about wide-character support in
the standard C library and Unicode?
> Personally, I think an implementation that supports UTF-8 as the only
> multibyte encoding and 16-bit Unicode codepoints (only the BMP) as its
> internal wide character format is more than enough for DJGPP.
Yes, I agree.
> Btw, one feature that I sorely miss in DJGPP is the positional format
> specifiers in printf family (%$1 etc.). It is required in gettext to be
> able to rearrange words in translated messages; right-to-left languages
> such as Arabic and Hebrew need that quite a lot. Perhaps someone would
> like to work on that, it shouldn't be hard to implement.
I thought Juan Manuel Guerrero was looking at that. Maybe I've got my wires
crossed.
> > These
> > return wctype_t and wctrans_t values respectively, which are opaque types.
> > wctype_t is defined as an unsigned short.
>
> IIRC, the unsigned short part was due to compatibility with Windows (via
> RSXNT).
OK, thanks.
Bye, Rich =]
--
Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]
- Raw text -