[Fwd: [1.7] wcwidth failing configure tests]

[Jeff Johnston]

Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On May 15 00:58, IWAMURO Motonori wrote:
>   
>> 2009/5/13 Corinna Vinschen <vinschen@redhat.com>:
>>     
>>>> http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/ucs/wcwidth.c
>>>>         
>>> This looks nice.
>>>       
>> Do you import Markus Kuhn's wcwidth implementation?
>>
>>     
>>>> Trouble is, there's the thorny issue of the "CJK Ambiguous Width"
>>>> category of characters, which consists of things like Greek and
>>>> Cyrillic letters as well as line drawing symbols. Those have a width
>>>> of 1 in Western use, yet with CJK fonts they have a width of 2. That's
>>>> why Markus Kuhn's code includes the mk_wcswidth_cjk() variant.
>>>>         
>>> We should use the standard variation alone, imho.
>>>       
>> I don't think so.
>>
>> 1) It is very very inconvenient for me :-)
>> (Now, I apply the local patch of CJK width support to cygwin1.dll in
>> my environment.)
>>
>> 2) Unicode Standard Annex #11
>> http://www.unicode.org/unicode/reports/tr11/ recommends:
>>     
>>> 5 Recommendations
>>>       
>> (snip)
>>     
>>> When processing or displaying data
>>>       
>> (snip)
>>     
>>> Ambiguous characters behave like wide or narrow characters depending
>>> on the context (language tag, script identification, associated
>>> font, source of data, or explicit markup; all can provide the
>>> context). If the context cannot be established reliably, they should
>>> be treated as narrow characters by default.
>>>       
>> The recommendation is independent of legacy encoding.
>>
>> I think that a new locale category that specifies the "context" is necessary.
>> Because the "context" influences only the display or text layout.
>>
>> However, there is no such standard now.
>>
>> Therefore, I propose to use *_cjk() when the language part of LC_CTYPE
>> is 'ja', 'ko', 'vi' or 'zh'.
>>     
>
> That would be fine with me, but tests for the actual language are not
> used anywhere in newlib, so that's something very new.  Can we check in my patch for the time being and
> extend it with the CJK variation later?  I will not be available for the
> next two weeks, but I'd be glad if at least the default variation can go
> in so I can create another Cygwin test release before I'm offline.
>
>
>   
Corinna, I have no problem with checking the new patch in and extending 
this later, assuming you have thoroughly tested this implementation.

-- Jeff J.
> Corinna
>
>   


--
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/