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

Groups > comp.lang.c > #75831

Re: Is wchar_t really useful?

From Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: Is wchar_t really useful?
Date 2015-11-12 16:44 +0100
Organization solani.org
Message-ID <n22c4n$bjr$1@solani.org> (permalink)
References <n1puh2$17n$1@solani.org> <n1q8v2$f03$1@dont-email.me> <n227bt$q5b$1@solani.org> <n229li$hvg$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

On 12.11.2015 16:04, James Kuyper wrote:

> Why exactly are you interested in how an implementation could weasel out
> of this requirement? As I understand it, there's a simple process that
> goes on when designing this part of an implementation of C: choose what
> extended character sets you want to support, and which encoding. Then
> choose a single character encoding capable of representing all of those
> characters, and define wchar_t to be a type big enough to store the
> representations of any of those characters. Did you have a different
> implementation design process in mind?
> 

1) AFAIK, Windows compilers tend to use a 16-bit wchar_t, and assume
sequences of wchar_t to be UTF-16-encoded. Thus there are characters
that don't fit into a wchar_t. How do these implementations get around
the sandard requirement?
2) SDCC used to support ISO-8559-1 as character set, but will probably
move to UTF-8-encoded unicode for the next release. Historically, SDCC
used an 8-bit wchar_t. Will SDCC have to change to a bigger wchar_t? OR
could it just continue with the 8-bit wchar_t and have sequences of
wchar_t UTF-8-encoded?

Philipp

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Is wchar_t really useful? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2015-11-09 12:02 +0100
  Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-09 03:24 -0800
    Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-10 18:33 -0600
      Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-11-11 13:56 +1300
  Re: Is wchar_t really useful? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-11-09 09:03 -0500
    Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2015-11-12 15:22 +0100
      Re: Is wchar_t really useful? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-11-12 10:04 -0500
        Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2015-11-12 16:44 +0100
          Re: Is wchar_t really useful? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-11-12 11:29 -0500
            Re: Is wchar_t really useful? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-12 09:14 -0800
              Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-14 11:50 -0800
                Re: Is wchar_t really useful? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-15 13:44 -0800
                Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2015-11-15 22:50 +0100
                Re: Is wchar_t really useful? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-15 14:46 -0800
                Re: Is wchar_t really useful? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-11-17 22:34 +0000
                Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-16 07:25 -0800
            Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2015-11-13 17:26 +0100
              Re: Is wchar_t really useful? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-11-13 13:36 -0500
                Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-13 16:37 -0600
                Re: Is wchar_t really useful? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-11-13 17:58 -0500
              Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-13 16:01 -0600
                Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2015-11-13 23:36 +0100
    Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2015-11-12 15:28 +0100
      Re: Is wchar_t really useful? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-11-12 10:26 -0500
    Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-12 14:27 -0600
  Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Lőrinczy Zsigmond <nospam@for.me> - 2015-11-13 05:02 +0100
    Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2015-11-13 11:52 +0100
      Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-13 05:17 -0800
        Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-13 12:58 -0600
        Re: Is wchar_t really useful? supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-13 11:14 -0800
    Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-13 12:45 -0600
  Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2015-11-13 18:24 +0100
    Re: Is wchar_t really useful? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-11-13 13:55 -0500
      Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2015-11-13 20:39 +0100
        Re: Is wchar_t really useful? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-11-13 14:54 -0500
        Re: Is wchar_t really useful? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-13 17:04 -0600

csiph-web