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

Re: UTF-8 curses

To: linux-utf8@nl.linux.org
Subject: Re: UTF-8 curses
From: Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS <edmundo@rano.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 10:53:51 +0100
In-Reply-To: <199910260923.FAA08119@shell.clark.net>
References: <19991026100656.B1192@daisy.vocalis.com> <199910260923.FAA08119@shell.clark.net>
Reply-To: linux-utf8@nl.linux.org
Sender: owner-linux-utf8@nl.linux.org

> > The UNIX spec says curses addstr takes a multibyte string (which may 
> > or may not be UTF-8). This means that it's not compatible with the 
> > traditional 8-bit curses. So I'm supposed to have two versions of the 
> 
> traditional curses (the one in the spec ;-) is not really 8-bit clean.
> some implementations are - but not long enough to call them "traditional".

Maybe "traditional" is the wrong word, but a typical Linux system has
a lot of curses programs happily working in Latin-1 (or some other
8-bit character set) and it would be shame to break them all.

Edmund
-
Linux-UTF8:   i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive:      http://mail.nl.linux.org/lists/

References:
- Re: UTF-8 curses
  - From: Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS <edmundo@rano.demon.co.uk>
- Re: UTF-8 curses
  - From: "T.E.Dickey" <dickey@clark.net>
- Re: UTF-8 curses
  - From: "T.E.Dickey" <dickey@clark.net>

Prev by Date: Re: UTF-8 curses
Next by Date: Re: UTF-8 curses
Prev by thread: Re: UTF-8 curses
Next by thread: Re: UTF-8 curses
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread