Re: [boost] Boost.Process 0.5: Another update/potential candidate for an official library

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Process 0.5: Another update/potential candidate for an official library
From: Yakov Galka (ybungalobill_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-11-17 06:15:28

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:55 PM, Alexander Lamaison <awl03_at_[hidden]>wrote:

> [...]
> > [...] it is at least consistent.
> >
> > So does using UTF-8 everywhere.
>
> That would indeed be consistent, but, alas, it isn't possible without
> the consent of the compiler/STL which doesn't seem to be forthcoming.
>

As Peter correctly noted, nothing will move if everyone is driven by this
logic. The change must be done by incremental steps, especially since I do
not see Microsoft changing their implementation unilaterally (vendor
lock-in?). People in WG21 can try to push it into the standard in some form
(e.g. mandate or at least recommend the basic execution character set to be
capable of storing Unicode). This would be great, but I estimate it to be a
path of greater resistance.

So what do you do when you need at pass a string to the C++ runtime or
> standard library?

Depends on what part of the library. Most of the standard library string
handling functions are encoding agnostic.

>  (Yes, I'm aware of Artyom's Nowide library due for
> review but, as far as I'm aware, that doesn't replace all C++/STL
> functions that take strings).
>

It replaces all those standard functions that interact with with the
system. Which other do matter? Those that specifically deal with encodings
(mbtowc, etc..) are useless on Windows because they do not support UTF-8...

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Alexander Lamaison <awl03_at_[hidden]>wrote:

> [...]
> Indeed.  But the decisions must happen well above the paygrade of an
> individual library author.  It would need at least a Boost-wide policy
> change or, preferably, agreement among the Windows C++ compiler/library
> developers.
>

Agree, and see above.

-- 
Yakov