From: Peter C. Chapin on 11 Jan 2010 07:17 James Kanze <james.kanze(a)gmail.com> wrote in news:fc2b2c43-3e94-4f6d-aaa4- 2b7c9d856ad2(a)d20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com: > On Jan 8, 1:40 pm, Le Chaud Lapin <jaibudu...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Jan 8, 12:48 am, Mathias Gaunard <loufo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Then what are they for, and why have they been included in C++0x? > > Because you can't implement UTF-16 and UTF-32 character and > string literals without them. Perhaps this is a FAQ, but I'm wondering what role wchar_t has in C++0x now that we have types char16_t and char32_t. Is wchar_t now considered "legacy support only" or is there some feature that it provides that is not provided by the new types? Peter -- [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ] [ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]
From: Mathias Gaunard on 16 Jan 2010 02:26 On 11 jan, 22:01, James Kanze <james.ka...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Because you can't implement UTF-16 and UTF-32 character and > string literals without them. (Except that I disagree with > regards to their utility. I find it rather a step forward to > have a type which I know can hold a UTF-16 or a UTF-32 element.) uint_least16_t and uint_least32_t work just as well for that. Sure, it doesn't have the semantic attached to it, but that's not needed to hold elements. -- [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ] [ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]
From: SG on 17 Jan 2010 21:49 On 16 Jan., 20:26, Mathias Gaunard <loufo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 11 jan, 22:01, James Kanze <james.ka...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > I find it rather a step forward to have a type > > which I know can hold a UTF-16 or a UTF-32 element.) > > uint_least16_t and uint_least32_t work just as well for that. > Sure, it doesn't have the semantic attached to it, but that's not > needed to hold elements. Though, there is a difference between uint_least16_t and char16_t. The first is just an alias of some integer type while the second is a distinct type. I'm not sure how important this is in reality but it affects overloading, for example. Just wanted to mention this. Cheers, SG -- [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ] [ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]
From: Le Chaud Lapin on 18 Jan 2010 02:59 On Jan 18, 8:49 am, SG <s.gesem...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 16 Jan., 20:26, Mathias Gaunard <loufo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > uint_least16_t and uint_least32_t work just as well for that. > > Sure, it doesn't have the semantic attached to it, but that's not > > needed to hold elements. > > Though, there is a difference between uint_least16_t and char16_t. The > first is just an alias of some integer type while the second is a > distinct type. I'm not sure how important this is in reality but it > affects overloading, for example. Just wanted to mention this. Which is one of the reasons I need the reach char16_t and char32_t. My code is type-driven, and being network-oriented, numerical type codes for char16_t and char32_t must remain invariant from one network node to another. What disturbs me is that, within the next few months, I will be forced to commit. I will have to choose wchar_t or char16_t, but as char16_t is not available, and there is no indication of when it might become available, I must use wchar_t for now, but will not be able to change to char16_t when it becomes available without a total recall of all deployed network software. Patchwork-trickery of various kinds that one might imagine to circumvent this issue do not seem to work in my heavily type-driven code. :( -Le Chaud Lapin- -- [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ] [ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]
From: Jerry Coffin on 18 Jan 2010 13:45 In article <20b7032a-896f-4702-b9b8-62d164ec5474 @h9g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, jaibuduvin(a)gmail.com says... > > { The question concerns the two C++0x types char16_t and char32_t. -mod } > > Hi All, > > Any idea when these two types [char16_t and char32_t] will be > commonly supported across major compilers? They are currently supported in gcc and the beta version of VS/VC++ 2010. I'd expect that most compilers that don't support them already will probably add that support quite quickly. -- Later, Jerry. [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ] [ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]
First
|
Prev
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 Prev: How to create a shallow copy without calling a constructor? Next: Generic compare function |