Re: Proposal for 2 Byte Unicode implementation in gcc and glibc

[Florian Weimer <fw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

  Ulrich Drepper <drepper@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Florian Weimer <fw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > UTF-32 isn't fixed width either (think of combining characters).  To
> > be honest, I don't see your point here.
> 
> Don't talk such a nonsense.  Combining characters and surogates are
> not at all comparable.  The functions which have to handle character
> properties with wchar_t can and should expect precomposed input
> somthing which is not at all possible with UTF-16.  

I see, thanks.  This is indeed a strong argument against UTF-32 (as
long as useful characters are allocated beyond the BMP, not only some
esoteric scripts).

> But why discussing all this?  There will be no first order 16bit
> UCS2/UTF-16 support.

For GNU C and GNU libc, this is true (if you say so).  But the world
doesn't consist entirely of GNU libc, and there are even other
programming languages. ;-)
-
Linux-UTF8:   i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive:      http://mail.nl.linux.org/lists/