[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Genx

• To: David Tolpin <dvd@d...>
• Subject: Re: Genx
• From: Adam Turoff <ziggy@p...>
• Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 17:24:44 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <200401212147.i0LLlRP0016527@a...>
• References: <400EF09E.1040106@d...> <200401212147.i0LLlRP0016527@a...>
• User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 01:47:27AM +0400, David Tolpin wrote:
> Rich Salz:
> > Why not just do everything in UTF-8.  All this wchar_t, "asdfasdf"L 
> > support, etc., is going to complicate the API.  Seems simpler to have 
> > the basic API, and for those not working in UTF-8 (or its subset:), they 
> > only have to remember a single consistent rule:  call "convert()" first.
> 
> That would be the best. I wanted to suggest that but thought it was stupid.
> At least I am not alone.

I was looking at expat.h to see what James did.  Expat automagically 
switches between UTF-8 and UTF-16, and that's a build time option.  

What's the use case for an app to use both UTF-8 and UTF-32 concurrently
with genx?  I've been using expat since approximately the beginning of
time, and I've only dealt with a single encoding (UTF-8).  Having the
API unified behind a single XML_Char type -- UTF-8, UTF-16, UTF-128 or
whatever -- certainly helps.  

So, are the genx*W API calls even necessary? Can all of this complexity
be hidden behind a single typedef like James' XML_Char?  Actually, can
it be hidden behind that specific set of typedefs?  Anyone who really,
desperately, needs to avoid the encoding genx uses will know what to do.

Z.

• References:
  • Re: Genx
    • From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>
  • Re: Genx
    • From: David Tolpin <dvd@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Genx
• Next by Date: Re: Genx
• Previous by thread: Re: Genx
• Next by thread: Re: Genx
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread