status of utf-8 patch

[Larry Hall (Cygwin)]

<http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#TOFU>.  Reformatted.

Ariel Burbaickij wrote:
> On 7/9/07, Larry Hall (Cygwin) <reply-to-list-only-lh <AT> cygwin <DOT> com> wrote:
                                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

<http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PCYMTNQREAIYR>  Please, let's not feed the
spammers.


>> Matt Seitz wrote:
>> > "Brian Dessent" <brian <AT> dessent <DOT> net> wrote in message
>> > news:46921D75.29CE8798@dessent.net...
>> >> Ariel Burbaickij wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> question: what is  the status of utf-8 patch fo cygwin? Is it
>> >> You can find all the details in the mailing list archives.
>> >> <http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-patches/2006-q3/msg00014.html>
>> >>
>> >>> endorsed/supported?
>> >> It was submitted and rejected on technical grounds, which means sadly
>> >> it's not supported here.
>> >
>> > The explanation I saw for the rejection was "...it should just be a
>> > wholesale replacement, not a bunch of wrappers around existing 
>> functions."
>> >
>> > It's now a year later.  Is there an expectation that the "wholesale
>> > replacement" or another solution is coming soon?  What would be the 
>> harm in
>> > adopting the current solution for now?  Is this a case of "the 
>> perfect is
>> > the enemy of the good"?
>>
>>
>> No.  It's more like the "the limited hack is the enemy of future 
>> progress".
>> It should be _a_little_ easier to implement something maintainable with
>> 1.7 code (in CVS), since Win9x support is no longer a requirement.
>>
> Have you some outlines of this something given WIn 9x support can be
> dropped, indeed?


Not really, no.  But Win9x definitely complicated the API and forced Cygwin
down a path that is the genesis of this problem.  Removing the requirements
to support these limited O/S versions should make UNICODE/UTF8 support
cleaner.


-- 
Larry Hall                              http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
216 Dalton Rd.                          (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746

_____________________________________________________________________

A: Yes.
 > Q: Are you sure?
 >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
 >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/