Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #11783 > unrolled thread

Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c++

Contents

  Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-11-24 15:40 +0100
    Re: Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-11-24 14:53 +0000
      Re: Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-11-24 16:06 +0100
        Re: Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-11-24 15:54 +0000
          Re: Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-11-24 17:10 +0100
            Re: Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-11-24 16:28 +0000
              Re: Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-11-24 18:06 +0100
                Re: Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-11-24 18:24 +0000
            Re: Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-11-24 20:16 +0100
              Re: Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-11-25 04:34 -0800
                Re: Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-11-25 14:31 +0000
                  Re: Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles Tobias Müller <troplin@bluewin.ch> - 2011-11-26 09:20 +0000
                Re: Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2011-11-25 21:50 -0800
    Re: Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles "Liviu" <lab2k1@gmail.c0m> - 2011-11-24 12:30 -0600
      Re: Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-11-24 20:31 +0100
        Re: Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles "Liviu" <lab2k1@gmail.c0m> - 2011-11-24 14:10 -0600
    Re: Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles Johannes Schaub <schaub.johannes@googlemail.com> - 2011-11-24 22:20 +0100
      Re: Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-11-24 23:27 +0100

#11783 — Request for comments on forthcoming blog posting about Unicode in Windows consoles

http://alfps.wordpress.com/?p=356&shareadraft=4ece5380818f3

You may have a chance to affect the final posting... :-)

The link is just to an unfinished draft (maybe I'll complete this this 
evening), but much read-worthy there, I think.


Cheers,

- Alf

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#11784

On 24/11/2011 14:40, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
> http://alfps.wordpress.com/?p=356&shareadraft=4ece5380818f3
>
> You may have a chance to affect the final posting... :-)
>
> The link is just to an unfinished draft (maybe I'll complete this this
> evening), but much read-worthy there, I think.

Off-topic.

HTH.

/Leigh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11785

On 24.11.2011 15:53, Leigh Johnston wrote:
> On 24/11/2011 14:40, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>> http://alfps.wordpress.com/?p=356&shareadraft=4ece5380818f3
>>
>> You may have a chance to affect the final posting... :-)
>>
>> The link is just to an unfinished draft (maybe I'll complete this this
>> evening), but much read-worthy there, I think.
>
> Off-topic.

I wouldn't have posted here if I thought it was off topic here.

Despite the lack of a charter for this newsgroup.

It's about using the C++ language and about limitations in the C++ 
standard library.

You may of course think that it's environment specific, like, 
"Windows!". And in one very limited sense it is. But on the other hand, 
it is necessary to discuss these details in order to be able to write 
portable C++ code.

As a minimum example, the copy program in Josutti's book, while intended 
to be portable and by many people believed to be portable, is not. It is 
actually environment specific, while appearing to be portable. While the 
code I'm discussing is opposite: it may appear to be 
environment-specific, but is actually in support of portability ;-).

Cheers & hth., & thanks for the comment!,

- Alf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11787

On 24/11/2011 15:06, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
> On 24.11.2011 15:53, Leigh Johnston wrote:
>> On 24/11/2011 14:40, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>>> http://alfps.wordpress.com/?p=356&shareadraft=4ece5380818f3
>>>
>>> You may have a chance to affect the final posting... :-)
>>>
>>> The link is just to an unfinished draft (maybe I'll complete this this
>>> evening), but much read-worthy there, I think.
>>
>> Off-topic.
>
> I wouldn't have posted here if I thought it was off topic here.
>
> Despite the lack of a charter for this newsgroup.
>
> It's about using the C++ language and about limitations in the C++
> standard library.
>
> You may of course think that it's environment specific, like,
> "Windows!". And in one very limited sense it is. But on the other hand,
> it is necessary to discuss these details in order to be able to write
> portable C++ code.
>
> As a minimum example, the copy program in Josutti's book, while intended
> to be portable and by many people believed to be portable, is not. It is
> actually environment specific, while appearing to be portable. While the
> code I'm discussing is opposite: it may appear to be
> environment-specific, but is actually in support of portability ;-).

Your code *is* environment specific; it doesn't just *appear* to be 
environment specific hence it is off-topic here; try posting it in a 
Micro$oft newsgroup instead.

HTH.

/Leigh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11788

On 24.11.2011 16:54, Leigh Johnston wrote:
> On 24/11/2011 15:06, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>> On 24.11.2011 15:53, Leigh Johnston wrote:
>>> On 24/11/2011 14:40, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://alfps.wordpress.com/?p=356&shareadraft=4ece5380818f3
>>>>
>>>> You may have a chance to affect the final posting... :-)
>>>>
>>>> The link is just to an unfinished draft (maybe I'll complete this this
>>>> evening), but much read-worthy there, I think.
>>>
>>> Off-topic.
>>
>> I wouldn't have posted here if I thought it was off topic here.
>>
>> Despite the lack of a charter for this newsgroup.
>>
>> It's about using the C++ language and about limitations in the C++
>> standard library.
>>
>> You may of course think that it's environment specific, like,
>> "Windows!". And in one very limited sense it is. But on the other hand,
>> it is necessary to discuss these details in order to be able to write
>> portable C++ code.
>>
>> As a minimum example, the copy program in Josutti's book, while intended
>> to be portable and by many people believed to be portable, is not. It is
>> actually environment specific, while appearing to be portable. While the
>> code I'm discussing is opposite: it may appear to be
>> environment-specific, but is actually in support of portability ;-).
>
> Your code *is* environment specific; it doesn't just *appear* to be
> environment specific hence it is off-topic here; try posting it in a
> Micro$oft newsgroup instead.

You didn't get the point.

But thank you for the advice about posting to Microsoft groups.

Although I am sure that you were suggesting that for entirely wrong reasons.

Posting to a Microsoft group could in principle be useful for getting 
some action going so that the same C++ code could be used portably in 
Windows and Linux (at least). However, I know from experience that such 
postings are met with hate and disdain from the fanboys that frequent 
the MS groups. Similarly, Microsoft's very practical suggestion to have 
source code files start with a BOM, is ridiculed in the *nix Unicode FAQ 
and other *nix documents. So there's much hate and idiocy on both sides 
of that historical conflict. I'd rather avoid that.

Folks who read this group can instead learn a lot about C++, and help to 
influence the future, by reading good blogs such as mine. ;-)

http://alfps.wordpress.com/?p=356&shareadraft=4ece5380818f3


Cheers & hth.,

- Alf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11790

On 24/11/2011 16:10, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
> On 24.11.2011 16:54, Leigh Johnston wrote:
>> On 24/11/2011 15:06, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>>> On 24.11.2011 15:53, Leigh Johnston wrote:
>>>> On 24/11/2011 14:40, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://alfps.wordpress.com/?p=356&shareadraft=4ece5380818f3
>>>>>
>>>>> You may have a chance to affect the final posting... :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> The link is just to an unfinished draft (maybe I'll complete this this
>>>>> evening), but much read-worthy there, I think.
>>>>
>>>> Off-topic.
>>>
>>> I wouldn't have posted here if I thought it was off topic here.
>>>
>>> Despite the lack of a charter for this newsgroup.
>>>
>>> It's about using the C++ language and about limitations in the C++
>>> standard library.
>>>
>>> You may of course think that it's environment specific, like,
>>> "Windows!". And in one very limited sense it is. But on the other hand,
>>> it is necessary to discuss these details in order to be able to write
>>> portable C++ code.
>>>
>>> As a minimum example, the copy program in Josutti's book, while intended
>>> to be portable and by many people believed to be portable, is not. It is
>>> actually environment specific, while appearing to be portable. While the
>>> code I'm discussing is opposite: it may appear to be
>>> environment-specific, but is actually in support of portability ;-).
>>
>> Your code *is* environment specific; it doesn't just *appear* to be
>> environment specific hence it is off-topic here; try posting it in a
>> Micro$oft newsgroup instead.
>
> You didn't get the point.
>
> But thank you for the advice about posting to Microsoft groups.
>
> Although I am sure that you were suggesting that for entirely wrong
> reasons.
>
> Posting to a Microsoft group could in principle be useful for getting
> some action going so that the same C++ code could be used portably in
> Windows and Linux (at least). However, I know from experience that such
> postings are met with hate and disdain from the fanboys that frequent
> the MS groups. Similarly, Microsoft's very practical suggestion to have
> source code files start with a BOM, is ridiculed in the *nix Unicode FAQ
> and other *nix documents. So there's much hate and idiocy on both sides
> of that historical conflict. I'd rather avoid that.
>
> Folks who read this group can instead learn a lot about C++, and help to
> influence the future, by reading good blogs such as mine. ;-)
>
> http://alfps.wordpress.com/?p=356&shareadraft=4ece5380818f3

You are the one who is missing the point; hint: facets.

Your code is platform specific so discussing it in this newsgroup would 
cause annoyance to lots of readers who consider such discussion "noise".

/Leigh

/Leigh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11792

On 24.11.2011 17:28, Leigh Johnston wrote:
> On 24/11/2011 16:10, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>> On 24.11.2011 16:54, Leigh Johnston wrote:
>>> On 24/11/2011 15:06, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>>>> On 24.11.2011 15:53, Leigh Johnston wrote:
>>>>> On 24/11/2011 14:40, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> http://alfps.wordpress.com/?p=356&shareadraft=4ece5380818f3
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You may have a chance to affect the final posting... :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The link is just to an unfinished draft (maybe I'll complete this
>>>>>> this
>>>>>> evening), but much read-worthy there, I think.
>>>>>
>>>>> Off-topic.
>>>>
>>>> I wouldn't have posted here if I thought it was off topic here.
>>>>
>>>> Despite the lack of a charter for this newsgroup.
>>>>
>>>> It's about using the C++ language and about limitations in the C++
>>>> standard library.
>>>>
>>>> You may of course think that it's environment specific, like,
>>>> "Windows!". And in one very limited sense it is. But on the other hand,
>>>> it is necessary to discuss these details in order to be able to write
>>>> portable C++ code.
>>>>
>>>> As a minimum example, the copy program in Josutti's book, while
>>>> intended
>>>> to be portable and by many people believed to be portable, is not.
>>>> It is
>>>> actually environment specific, while appearing to be portable. While
>>>> the
>>>> code I'm discussing is opposite: it may appear to be
>>>> environment-specific, but is actually in support of portability ;-).
>>>
>>> Your code *is* environment specific; it doesn't just *appear* to be
>>> environment specific hence it is off-topic here; try posting it in a
>>> Micro$oft newsgroup instead.
>>
>> You didn't get the point.
>>
>> But thank you for the advice about posting to Microsoft groups.
>>
>> Although I am sure that you were suggesting that for entirely wrong
>> reasons.
>>
>> Posting to a Microsoft group could in principle be useful for getting
>> some action going so that the same C++ code could be used portably in
>> Windows and Linux (at least). However, I know from experience that such
>> postings are met with hate and disdain from the fanboys that frequent
>> the MS groups. Similarly, Microsoft's very practical suggestion to have
>> source code files start with a BOM, is ridiculed in the *nix Unicode FAQ
>> and other *nix documents. So there's much hate and idiocy on both sides
>> of that historical conflict. I'd rather avoid that.
>>
>> Folks who read this group can instead learn a lot about C++, and help to
>> influence the future, by reading good blogs such as mine. ;-)
>>
>> http://alfps.wordpress.com/?p=356&shareadraft=4ece5380818f3
>
> You are the one who is missing the point; hint: facets.

I liked your earlier comments, but not this one: I'm not much interested 
in broad, purely associative hints.

It's not bad as a first idea when confronted with the issue.

But you can be sure that every person who has confronted that issue, 
including me (but evidently not yourself), has tried it out.

Anyway, to find out the reasons why the locale/facet approach is 
misguided and non-working, you can read my blog postings. :-)

But if a shallow reason is enough, just note that the standard streams 
from <iostream> are not required to honor an imbued locale's codecvt 
facet, and that while that works with Visual C++, the g++ compiler does 
take advantage of the standard's license to not support it. A file 
stream buffer, on the other hand, is explicitly required to use the 
codecvt facet of the imbued locale. See, you learned something today!


> Your code is platform specific so discussing it in this newsgroup would
> cause annoyance to lots of readers who consider such discussion "noise".

I hope that people here can form their own opinions both about the 
alleged facts and how relevant it.

But as it happens, if you'd but click on the link and look at what you 
have so strong opinions about, you'd find an edit field for feedback.


Cheers & hth.,

- Alf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11794

On 24/11/2011 17:06, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
> On 24.11.2011 17:28, Leigh Johnston wrote:
>> On 24/11/2011 16:10, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>>> On 24.11.2011 16:54, Leigh Johnston wrote:
>>>> On 24/11/2011 15:06, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>>>>> On 24.11.2011 15:53, Leigh Johnston wrote:
>>>>>> On 24/11/2011 14:40, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://alfps.wordpress.com/?p=356&shareadraft=4ece5380818f3
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You may have a chance to affect the final posting... :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The link is just to an unfinished draft (maybe I'll complete this
>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>> evening), but much read-worthy there, I think.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Off-topic.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wouldn't have posted here if I thought it was off topic here.
>>>>>
>>>>> Despite the lack of a charter for this newsgroup.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's about using the C++ language and about limitations in the C++
>>>>> standard library.
>>>>>
>>>>> You may of course think that it's environment specific, like,
>>>>> "Windows!". And in one very limited sense it is. But on the other
>>>>> hand,
>>>>> it is necessary to discuss these details in order to be able to write
>>>>> portable C++ code.
>>>>>
>>>>> As a minimum example, the copy program in Josutti's book, while
>>>>> intended
>>>>> to be portable and by many people believed to be portable, is not.
>>>>> It is
>>>>> actually environment specific, while appearing to be portable. While
>>>>> the
>>>>> code I'm discussing is opposite: it may appear to be
>>>>> environment-specific, but is actually in support of portability ;-).
>>>>
>>>> Your code *is* environment specific; it doesn't just *appear* to be
>>>> environment specific hence it is off-topic here; try posting it in a
>>>> Micro$oft newsgroup instead.
>>>
>>> You didn't get the point.
>>>
>>> But thank you for the advice about posting to Microsoft groups.
>>>
>>> Although I am sure that you were suggesting that for entirely wrong
>>> reasons.
>>>
>>> Posting to a Microsoft group could in principle be useful for getting
>>> some action going so that the same C++ code could be used portably in
>>> Windows and Linux (at least). However, I know from experience that such
>>> postings are met with hate and disdain from the fanboys that frequent
>>> the MS groups. Similarly, Microsoft's very practical suggestion to have
>>> source code files start with a BOM, is ridiculed in the *nix Unicode FAQ
>>> and other *nix documents. So there's much hate and idiocy on both sides
>>> of that historical conflict. I'd rather avoid that.
>>>
>>> Folks who read this group can instead learn a lot about C++, and help to
>>> influence the future, by reading good blogs such as mine. ;-)
>>>
>>> http://alfps.wordpress.com/?p=356&shareadraft=4ece5380818f3
>>
>> You are the one who is missing the point; hint: facets.
>
> I liked your earlier comments, but not this one: I'm not much interested
> in broad, purely associative hints.
>
> It's not bad as a first idea when confronted with the issue.
>
> But you can be sure that every person who has confronted that issue,
> including me (but evidently not yourself), has tried it out.
>
> Anyway, to find out the reasons why the locale/facet approach is
> misguided and non-working, you can read my blog postings. :-)
>
> But if a shallow reason is enough, just note that the standard streams
> from <iostream> are not required to honor an imbued locale's codecvt
> facet, and that while that works with Visual C++, the g++ compiler does
> take advantage of the standard's license to not support it. A file
> stream buffer, on the other hand, is explicitly required to use the
> codecvt facet of the imbued locale. See, you learned something today!

No I did not learn something new today; you simply reminded me of 
something that I had forgotten due to the fact that I very rarely write 
console programs; I write GUI programs.  Nevertheless it is off-topic 
and uninteresting and this is my last post in this thread.

/Leigh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11797

Le 24/11/11 17:10, Alf P. Steinbach a écrit :
>  So there's much hate and idiocy on both sides
> of that historical conflict. I'd rather avoid that.
>

You can't.

You can see that the answers here have all this underlying

"MY OS IS THE BEST"

type of idiocy. GNU fans consider Microsoft the evil empire
and Windows guys consider the "freetards" as mentally retarded.

Anything trying to be PORTABLE from one to the other
would imply trying to work on BOTH, an heresy for the fabs
of either system...

Note that "fan" comes from the word FANATIC.

jacob

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11815

On Nov 24, 7:16 pm, jacob navia <ja...@spamsink.net> wrote:
> Le 24/11/11 17:10, Alf P. Steinbach a écrit :
>
> >  So there's much hate and idiocy on both sides
> > of that historical conflict. I'd rather avoid that.
>
> You can't.
>
> You can see that the answers here have all this underlying

Also, the idea that comp.lang.c++ is restricted to the standardised
language and everything else is off-topic is simply not supported by
the groups charter, or its common usage in the early days of the
newsgroup.  Topicality fundamentalists like Leigh are a relatively new
occurence.

Of course, that was in the days when being a polite, helpful, decent
human being was considered preferable to being a language lawyer /
usenet cop.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11820

On 25/11/2011 12:34, gwowen wrote:
> On Nov 24, 7:16 pm, jacob navia<ja...@spamsink.net>  wrote:
>> Le 24/11/11 17:10, Alf P. Steinbach a écrit :
>>
>>>   So there's much hate and idiocy on both sides
>>> of that historical conflict. I'd rather avoid that.
>>
>> You can't.
>>
>> You can see that the answers here have all this underlying
>
> Also, the idea that comp.lang.c++ is restricted to the standardised
> language and everything else is off-topic is simply not supported by
> the groups charter, or its common usage in the early days of the
> newsgroup.  Topicality fundamentalists like Leigh are a relatively new
> occurence.

Bullshit; the closest there is to a "groups charter" is the FAQ and it says:

"Only post to comp.lang.c++ if your question is about the C++ language 
itself. For example, C++ code design, syntax, style, rules, bugs, etc. 
Ultimately this means your question must be answerable by looking into 
the C++ language definition as determined by the ISO/ANSI C++ Standard 
document, and by planned extensions and adjustments. Operating-specific 
questions (e.g., about Windows NT / 95 / 3.x, UNIX, etc.) should go to 
an operating-system-specific newsgroup (see below), not to comp.lang.c++."

So Alf's post is off-topic due to the fact that it is a platform 
specific post.

>
> Of course, that was in the days when being a polite, helpful, decent
> human being was considered preferable to being a language lawyer /
> usenet cop.

If you want to ignore the concept of a "topic" then we might as well 
just have a single newsgroup into which anyone could post any old 
garbage about any subject imaginable and live with the resultant "noise".

/Leigh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11846

Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> wrote:
> Bullshit; the closest there is to a "groups charter" is the FAQ and it says:
> 
> "Only post to comp.lang.c++ if your question is about the C++ language
> itself. For example, C++ code design, syntax, style, rules, bugs, etc.
> Ultimately this means your question must be answerable by looking into
> the C++ language definition as determined by the ISO/ANSI C++ Standard
> document, and by planned extensions and adjustments. Operating-specific
> questions (e.g., about Windows NT / 95 / 3.x, UNIX, etc.) should go to an
> operating-system-specific newsgroup (see below), not to comp.lang.c++."

However, a newsgroup is not only meant for asking a question and getting
the correct answer, but also for discussions.

> 
> So Alf's post is off-topic due to the fact that it is a platform specific post.
> 
>> 
>> Of course, that was in the days when being a polite, helpful, decent
>> human being was considered preferable to being a language lawyer /
>> usenet cop.
> 
> If you want to ignore the concept of a "topic" then we might as well just
> have a single newsgroup into which anyone could post any old garbage
> about any subject imaginable and live with the resultant "noise".

But questions or discussions can cover more than one topic (topic, as
defined by the usenet). Personally, I find a discussion that is partially
off topic much less disturbing than those "You're an idiot" - "shut up and
learn programming first" - "You're an idiot" - "shut up" discussions that
happen regularly on this list.

That said, I don't like posts that are completely off topic either. 

Tobi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11845

Well, I tested C++ that objects might eat heap memory very quickly.

Even I write assembly code to link with C++, it is still slow down with objects referenced BY MANY OBJECTS. 

I suspect that in modern cpus, any language that allocate too much in the heap will be slow down due to the cache swapping beyond programs use the memory in the heap beyond L1 and L2 in the long time.

Is there any better way to avoid this by writing all programs in C++?     

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11795

"Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> wrote...
>
> http://alfps.wordpress.com/?p=356&shareadraft=4ece5380818f3
>
> You may have a chance to affect the final posting... :-)

Off topic here, as noted already. I'll just add that the title you chose
is also off topic relative to the actual contents of your blog post ;-)

You seem to be writing about wide standard/stream I/O in console
apps compiled with VC++ v10 run under Windows' builtin command
line interpreter cmd.exe. Neither the "stream" notion, nor the compiler
and not even the CLI itself are part of the "Win32 console subsystem".
proper. You'd get different behavior compiling with ICC and running
under 4NT (now TCC) for example, though in both cases you'd be
effectively using the same underlying "Windows console subsystem".

Bye & hth,
Liviu

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11798

On 24.11.2011 19:30, Liviu wrote:
> "Alf P. Steinbach"<alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com>  wrote...
>>
>> http://alfps.wordpress.com/?p=356&shareadraft=4ece5380818f3
>>
>> You may have a chance to affect the final posting... :-)
>
> Off topic here, as noted already. I'll just add that the title you chose
> is also off topic relative to the actual contents of your blog post ;-)

That's rubbish. You're an idiot playing with social signals, that's all.


> You seem to be writing about wide standard/stream I/O in console
> apps compiled with VC++ v10 run under Windows' builtin command
> line interpreter cmd.exe. Neither the "stream" notion, nor the compiler
> and not even the CLI itself are part of the "Win32 console subsystem".
> proper. You'd get different behavior compiling with ICC and running
> under 4NT (now TCC) for example,

Maybe, maybe not. Since *all* your technical assertions have been wrong 
so far, I take this new assertion with a grain of salt (to put it 
mildly). However, as noted in the first blog post in that series, g++ 
has only C level support for Microsoft's _O_U8TEXT mode.

I think other readers understand that it's not possible to have 
discussed every issue in detail in the middle of a series of postings 
addressing the problem area. It would be a variation of Zeno's paradox.

But I think other readers understand that when I mentioned e.g. g++'s 
limited support, it was because I knew about it, because I have done 
everything that I write about, not because I (like you, so far) guessed 
that that might be the case and treated the plausible guess as a fact.


> though in both cases you'd be
> effectively using the same underlying "Windows console subsystem".

Yes, that's right, and I'm baffled reading something you have written 
that makes sense.


Cheers & hth.,

- Alf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11800

"Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> wrote...
>> "Alf P. Steinbach"<alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com>  wrote...
>>>
>>> http://alfps.wordpress.com/?p=356&shareadraft=4ece5380818f3
>>>
>>> You may have a chance to affect the final posting... :-)
>>
>> Off topic here, as noted already. I'll just add that the title you
>> chose is also off topic relative to the actual contents of your blog
>> post ;-)
>
> That's rubbish. You're an idiot playing with social signals, that's
> all.

Lighten up, Francis. Just because you are confused about Unicode
in Windows consoles, and seemingly bitter that you don't have a clue
as to how it all works, doesn't mean you can't write about it ;-)

However, get used to the idea that those who actually cared to learn
and understand won't stop writing actual Win32 Unicode console apps
(of which there are many real life examples) just because you personally
consider it too hard to comprehend.

That said, holidays call and I am out of here for good. You've got
the entire usenet and blogosphere playground all to yourself.

Liviu

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11801

Alf P. Steinbach wrote:

> http://alfps.wordpress.com/?p=356&shareadraft=4ece5380818f3
> 
> You may have a chance to affect the final posting... :-)
> 
> The link is just to an unfinished draft (maybe I'll complete this this
> evening), but much read-worthy there, I think.
> 

That's mean. Next time please post a preview about a C++ topic so that we 
all can help you and get fame in your "Thanks to" list. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#11805

On 24.11.2011 22:20, Johannes Schaub wrote:
> Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>
>> http://alfps.wordpress.com/?p=356&shareadraft=4ece5380818f3
>>
>> You may have a chance to affect the final posting... :-)
>>
>> The link is just to an unfinished draft (maybe I'll complete this this
>> evening), but much read-worthy there, I think.
>>
>
> That's mean. Next time please post a preview about a C++ topic so that we
> all can help you and get fame in your "Thanks to" list.

I know that you like formal standards issues.

And in that blog posting there are a few quotes from C+11 and C99 (just 
search for those terms).

Where you might conceivably disagree with my reading?

For the purely formal there's also the issue that Leigh Johnston 
unwittingly brought up.

Namely, whether imbuing a locale with some custom codecvt facet, in 
`std::wcout`, is guaranteed to have any effect?


Cheers,

- Alf

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c++

csiph-web