From: Daryle Walker (darylew_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-04-14 02:22:22
On 4/12/04 2:05 AM, "Vladimir Prus" <ghost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Daryle Walker wrote:
[SNIP]
>>> Do you know specific case there wchar_t does not implicitly means Unicode.
>>
>> Not personally, but that's about as relevant as asking for a platform whose
>> "char" isn't 8 bits. (I've heard platforms like that have existed.)
>
> I know one such platform which exists today, with 32-bit char. However, it
> (1) still uses ascii
> (2) you won't run string algrotithms on a DSP anyway
I meant something like a 9-bit EBCDIC "char" on an older computer. (I made
that up; I don't know if that case has really occurred.)
> Yes, implementation is allowed to use randomly-permuted ascii encoding. The
> point is that *if* user of such implementation really starts using
> program_options, it would be possible to accomodate that.
I'd rather not have an indefinitely-ticking portability time bomb left in
the code.
-- Daryle Walker Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie darylew AT hotmail DOT com