| Re: [AD] Windows unicode filename support |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
- To: alleg-developers@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [AD] Windows unicode filename support
- From: Victor <vwss1984@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 10:42:48 -0300 (ART)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.br; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=WOUQoozyUzJGC/5kweV4AVt/cpaoV3HQbw56dccTqv2e8Vmotn0LxJLTFFUyP5emiBc4+yx0qW/116GCfgPmXU35O6xi3q2m8BuZj0e+gCJ4xsvIOrviU+zXIsPzdCNR+ZGW//ei43HUlcqdKneQJSVWKDe1g10gsYUppu5Wue8= ;
As a game programmer using a portable library, I intend that my
software run everywhere regardless of OS details (even if the user is
running it in Win95, or maybe DOS). I agree, as a programmer, that
really is a bad pratice to depend in nôn-ÁNSI chãrçters, bút as a
nõn-ênglïsh spèaker they may eventually appear somewhere (sometimes
they could be some user input). Users don't want to know deep details
of the implementation, so limiting them to not use extended characters
is not a good choice (even if just on a few old OSes). So I think that
trying to support them, even if this could get complex, is a good idea.
Victor Williams Stafusa da Silva
--- Chris <chris.kcat@xxxxxxxxxx> escreveu:
> On Wednesday 03 May 2006 13:54, Michal Molhanec wrote:
> > Oops, sorry, I've send bad file. I'm really sorry for that.
>
> That patch is a bit overdone, don't you think? ASCII is too limited
> to
> properly display many characters, even with codepages since you can
> only have
> one set at a given time. You're still limited to less than 256
> characters.
> IMO, Unicode (UTF-8 or UTF-16) is the way to go, and Windows has
> support for
> UTF-16, so we should be using that.
>
> Unfortunately Win9x doesn't support Windows's Unicode functions
> properly, but
> those systems can continue to use the ASCII functions they've been
> using this
> whole time. Win9x doesn't lose anything, and WinNT/2K/XP gain Unicode
>
> character support.
>
> You could merge the patches, I suppose, but I really don't see the
> need. Win9x
> are old, and inherently less functional. The code that was there
> worked. This
> patch adds (unnecessary) complexity, and only benefits the handful of
> people
> that use extended characters in filenames and can't get WinXP, or
> even Win2K.
>
_______________________________________________________
Navegue com o Yahoo! Acesso Grátis, assista aos jogos do Brasil na Copa e ganhe prêmios de hora em hora!
http://br.yahoo.com/artilheirodacopa/