X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <201102021957.07676.bruno@clisp.org>
References: <201101310304 DOT 42975 DOT bruno AT clisp DOT org>	<201102021229 DOT 04623 DOT bruno AT clisp DOT org>	<4D4999BA DOT 2030100 AT cs DOT ucla DOT edu>	<201102021957 DOT 07676 DOT bruno AT clisp DOT org>
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 20:43:17 +0000
Message-ID: <AANLkTikRJxssP7OLr7O+DQZr-BpjpEZJ8Pe2uJ=msDbh@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#7948: 16-bit wchar_t on Windows and Cygwin
From: Andy Koppe <andy DOT koppe AT gmail DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Cc: Paul Eggert <eggert AT cs DOT ucla DOT edu>, Eric Blake <eblake AT redhat DOT com>,
        bug-gnulib AT gnu DOT org, bug-coreutils <bug-coreutils AT gnu DOT org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On 2 February 2011 18:57, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
>> > =C2=A0 - Define a type 'wwchar_t' on all platforms, equivalent to uint=
32_t
>> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 on Windows platforms and to 'wchar_t' otherwise.
>>
>> As a minor point, would it be OK to call this type
>> 'xchar_t' instead? =C2=A0'x' is the successor to 'w', after all,
>> and it can be thought of as an abbreviation for 'eXtended'.
>
> 'wwchar_t' means "wide wide character".
>
> In fact it's not really an "extended" character or "complex character".
> It's just what POSIX calls a 'wchar_t'.

It's extended in the sense that the original Unicode was only 16 bits
wide (which of course is why wchar_t on Windows is 16 bits). Also, I
think 'xchar_t' is less prone to typos, in particular forgetting one
of the dubyas.

Andy

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple