SAX/C++: UTF-8 v UTF-16
sb at metis.no
Fri Dec 3 13:07:48 GMT 1999
>>>>> James Clark <jjc at jclark.com>:
> Richard Anderson wrote:
>> > If you feel that one needs to be mandated, I would pick UTF-16.
>> I second that. The Vivid Creation SAX interfaces
>> http://www.vivid-creations.com/free/sax.h ) have been UTF-16 from day 1
>> around 16 months ago ) and to date they've had nothing but positive
>> feedback. I'd therefore make everything wchar_t and not char.
> Unfortunately wchar_t isn't guaranteed to be UTF-16. Some platforms
> make it 32-bits.
Yep! So I've heard.
Do you have a list of the ones that does this?
> However, I agree it's a good idea for SAXChar to be typedefed to
> wchar_t on platforms where wchar_t is UTF-16.
Hm... should we also to a
typedef basic_string<SAXChar> SAXstring;
(needs a better name, I lowercased the "s" in "string" to differ it
(pf course, then we would probably need SAXChar char_traits<> of some
sorts as well...)
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)
More information about the Xml-dev