>
> msevior@physics.unimelb.edu.au wrote:
>> *sigh* Yes Hub. We've had this conversation many times.
>>
>> There are *some* occasions when UT_String is appropriate (like when you
>> know an 8 bit char might use the most significant bit).
>
>
> No it is not. Unless UT_Strings store the encoding, this is a misuse.
> ASCII is 7 bits, everything else is just potential breakage, and
> everything should be converted utf-8 or ucs-2/4
>
>> That said, UT_UTF8String is almost always the appropriate class to use.
>
> s/almost//g
>
Hub, please try to think outside the box a bit. As you can see from
Roland's latest patch there are times when it makes sense to deal with
8-bit strings (not 7 bit strings). For these we need UT_String.
Please stop saying we will get rid of UT_String. I won't allow it in any
case.
Martin
>
> Hub
>
Received on Sun Jun 5 14:50:17 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Jun 05 2005 - 14:50:17 CEST