Boost logo

Boost :

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-09-26 15:04:29

At 01:31 PM 9/26/2001, Matt Austern wrote:

>dietmar_kuehl_at_[hidden] wrote:
>> I disagree and actually I think that it makes sense to even provide
>> XML parsing and processing facilities on ASCII characters: The
>> processor would have two modes, a fast one using ASCII only files
>> and a conforming, slower one using Unicode characters. The XML
>> specification requires that the latter works but doesn't object
>> to the former one.
>In practice I find that I never use ASCII; I use iso-8859-1 instead,
>which is a better match for HTML. (Also a better match for the LWG
>issues list. It helps to be able to write your name.)

(Dietmar's last name is really Kühl but in ASCII has to be written as

In commercial software I also use ISO-8859-1 (Latin-1) rather than
ASCII. One caveat - it is much easier if char is unsigned. An existing
code base failed miserably in dozens of places when first moving from ASCII
to ISO-8859-1, but worked right away once we set the compiler to treat char
as unsigned.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at