Re: Unicode support under Linux

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>]

Followup to:  <Pine.LNX.4.31.0110042155380.16009-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
By author:    Markus Kuhn <mgk25@xxxxxxxxx>
In newsgroup: linux.utf8
> 
> Yes. There is an optional macro symbol in the ISO C 99 standard that - if
> defined by the compiler - signals that wchar_t is always encoded according
> to ISO 10646, independent of the locale:
> 
>   __STDC_ISO_10646__
> 
> Glibc 2.2 defines that symbol. Other operating systems such as Solaris are
> not likely to follow, because they need to keep historic locales with
> wchar_t != UCS around for backwards compatibility reasons (though they now
> do provide for each historic locale an alternative with wchar_t = UCS).
> GNU didn't have any real wchar_t support before glibc 2.2, so there was no
> backwards compatibility problem.
> 

Well, they could have (and probably will, at some point) a
compiler/library option of some sort.

      -hpa
-- 
<hpa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> at work, <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt	<amsp@xxxxxxxxx>
-
Linux-UTF8:   i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive:      http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/