| Re: [AD] Proposal to kill non-UTF-8 support |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
>Yes, this proposal would practically prevent the user from using 16-bit
>Unicode as the text encoding format. Is it the role of a library, especially
>a cross-platform one, to impose such a choice ? The answer might be yes, if
>one thinks that UTF-8 is really better than 16-bit Unicode.
I'm not so sure about this. IMHO 32-bit unicode is The Right Thing, but I
can see the advantage of UTF-8 (backwards comnpatible with 7-bit ascii).
Still I would prefer to keep the current possibility to choose between
easy input/output (utf-8/ ascii) or easy string handling (16/32-bit unicode)
I thought the code was already there, or is it such a mess, does it need so much work?
BTW I always thought 16-bit unicode was an unnecessary limitation, how big
is the text data in an average program anyway, and 32-bit unicode texts compress very well.
16-bit unicode has a bit of a '640k is enough for everybody' smell to it ;-)
--
Martijn Versteegh