[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: the wchar_t type

To: linux-utf8@humbolt.geo.uu.nl
Subject: Re: the wchar_t type
From: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@cygnus.com>
Date: 20 Sep 1999 08:55:06 -0700
In-Reply-To: Bruno Haible's message of "Mon, 20 Sep 1999 16:53:11 +0200 (MET DST)"
References: <199909181223.OAA00813@moolenaar.net> <E11SNbm-0004EV-00@heaton.cl.cam.ac.uk> <199909201453.QAA07257@jaures.ilog.fr>
Reply-To: linux-utf8@humbolt.geo.uu.nl
Sender: owner-linux-utf8@humbolt.geo.uu.nl

Bruno Haible <haible@ilog.fr> writes:

>   - On 64-bit platforms, it is 64-bit. If you use wchar_t arrays, this
>     means 50% waste.

Check it again.  Int is already used.  At least all Linux 64-bit
platforms use int.  Otherwise glibc would not work at all.

-- 
---------------.      drepper at gnu.org  ,-.   1325 Chesapeake Terrace
Ulrich Drepper  \    ,-------------------'   \  Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA
Cygnus Solutions `--' drepper at cygnus.com   `------------------------
-
Linux-UTF8:   i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive:      http://mail.nl.linux.org/lists/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: the wchar_t type
  - From: Bruno Haible <haible@ilog.fr>

References:
- Re: Character set tagging considered harmful
  - From: Bram Moolenaar <Bram@moolenaar.net>
- Re: Character set tagging considered harmful
  - From: Markus Kuhn <Markus.Kuhn@cl.cam.ac.uk>
- Re: the wchar_t type
  - From: Bruno Haible <haible@ilog.fr>

Prev by Date: Re: the wchar_t type
Next by Date: Re: the wchar_t type
Prev by thread: Re: the wchar_t type
Next by thread: Re: the wchar_t type
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread