From: Adrian Michel (michel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-14 20:19:07
>
> 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.
Adrian