From: Michael Walter (michael.walter_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-10-21 19:52:49
> yes I do realise... the origonal statement was "...everybody agreed characters outside 16 bits are very rare, UTF-32 seems to never be needed." UTF-16 can indeed represent every Unicode character, but that is not what was written.
It must have been obvious to the poster of the original statement.
> One point that hasn't been mentioned so far is that, word sizes on most modern CPU's are 32bits wide. From a performance POV, the word-alignment may be a suitable justification for offsetting the increased storage requirements of a 32bit unit.
Of course from a performance POV you surely don't want to waste twice
(four times) as much memory in the cache either. Performance is always