From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-14 12:25:02
At 11:10 AM 11/14/2004, John Maddock wrote:
>> Damn! I always forget about Win 9x; I moved the NT at the first beta
>> never looked back.
>> So what happens in Win 9x when you use the wide API?
>It probably won't load the executable, or else just return a failure
>however there is something called the Microsoft Layer for Unicode that
>limited Unicode support to Win95/98/ME, see
I've been assuming Microsoft's Layer for Unicode, and was assuming that
Peter meant there were serious problems even if it was enabled. Maybe there
are some serious problems but it looks to me that we only need
WideCharToMultiByte, MultiByteToWideChar, AreFileApisANSI, and the wide
file management functions to work as documented. We don't care about
problems in the other portions of the API.
>If we insist that programs use this when run on these platforms
> (which let's
>be honest are all legacy systems now), then we can use wchar_t as the
>internal native character type and let Microsoft's own libraries take
>of code pages and translations. Presumably if they haven't got this code
>correct then no one will :-)
I reread the Microsoft docs last night and came to the same conclusion you
do. (As I have every time I've read them).
I'm going to do a prototype implementation on the assumption that we can
use wchar_t as the internal native character type for Windows, and char for
POSIX. If someone can provide a breaking test case, we will look at it and
see how serious it is.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk