From: Edward Diener (eddielee_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-14 20:46:02
Adrian Michel wrote:
>> I reiterate, having a function that takes 'wchar_t' arguments
>> doesn't tell you much about the kind of unicode support. Yes, it
>> *may* be utf-16, but 'supports unicode' means a *lot* more than
>> that. Neither can you
>> deduce from
>> 'wchar_t' the kind of encoding actually used, nor is an interface
>> that understands
>> utf-16 automatically 'unicode aware'.
> I am aware that in general the presence of wchar_t does not guarantee
> Unicode support. But on Windows at least, the absence of wchar_t
> guarantees the absence of Unicode support.
> Also, on Windows, as far as I can tell, Unicode is practically
> equivalent to using wchar_t, so to me seeing a method that takes a
> wchar_t* as parameter
> is at least an indication of Unicode support in that method.
> In any case, it seems to me that instances of boost::filesystem::path
> as it is implemented now, could not be created using Unicode strings
> on Windows.
C++ currently has no support for wide character filenames, so it isn't
surprising that Boost.Filesystem has no support for wide character
I have argued on comp.std.c++ for C++ support for wide character filenames
in its fstream implementation in the future. Although I met much resistance,
I have been told that the case is not yet shut on this and that there is
interest in it connected to locales.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk