• From: Steinar Bang <sb@m...>
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: 06 Dec 1999 15:38:10 +0100

>>>>> Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@g...>:

> * James Clark
>> 
>> Unfortunately wchar_t isn't guaranteed to be UTF-16.  Some platforms
>> make it 32-bits.

> gcc 2.95 on Linux does, at least. I don't know what it does on other
> platforms.

Ugh... that would be one of my target compilers eventually(*). :-/

I saw some discussion on the libstc++-v3 mailing list about having to
make wchar_t 32 bit, to make it able to hold UCS-4.  I didn't know it
ended up being the case.


(*) I'm currently using 1.2-pre2, because it was the first one that
    worked for me since egcs-1.0.3 and I probably won't upgrade again
    until gcc is reasonably stable.  And I'm currently not using
    wstring and wchar_t

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• References:
  • SAX/C++: C++-specific design principles
    • From: David Megginson <david@m...>
  • Re: SAX/C++: UTF-8 v UTF-16
    • From: James Clark <jjc@j...>
  • Re: SAX/C++: UTF-8 v UTF-16
    • From: "Richard Anderson" <rja@a...>
  • Re: SAX/C++: UTF-8 v UTF-16
    • From: James Clark <jjc@j...>
  • Re: SAX/C++: UTF-8 v UTF-16
    • From: Steinar Bang <sb@m...>
  • Re: SAX/C++: UTF-8 v UTF-16
    • From: Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@g...>

• Prev by Date: psgml 1.2.1 problem
• Next by Date: Re: SAX/C++ vs. SAX2
• Previous by thread: Re: SAX/C++: UTF-8 v UTF-16
• Next by thread: Re: SAX/C++: UTF-8 v UTF-16
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread