Unicode without UNICODE/_UNICODE?

re: Unicode without UNICODE/_UNICODE?

Yuhong Bao — Tue, 08 Feb 2011 18:10:03 GMT

The funny thing is that UTF-8 was invented one year before NT 3.1.

re: Unicode without UNICODE/_UNICODE?

Yuhong Bao — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 22:08:43 GMT

Don't forget the max two bytes per *Unicode* character converted from ACP/OEMCP assumption too (mentioned in this blog article, for example: blogs.msdn.com/.../369197.aspx). It is why HKSCS-2004 and Shift_JIS-2004 can't be the ACP (cp951 only worked because they mapped to Unicode PUA instead of the official code points beyond the BMP).

re: Unicode without UNICODE/_UNICODE?

Yuhong Bao — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 00:04:32 GMT

And BTW, some of the "code that assumes a maximum of two bytes per character" have been discussed over time in this blog. Search for "CharNextExA UTF-8" in this blog, for example.

re: Unicode without UNICODE/_UNICODE?

Economista Gerardo salazar Franco — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 14:39:46 GMT

Muy expectacular todo.thank you

re: Unicode without UNICODE/_UNICODE?

John Cowan — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 16:01:38 GMT

"Our server can handle 35 simultaneous connections fine, but thrashes when there are 70. Can you fix that?"

Programmer starts searching the source code for instances of "35" and changes them all to "70".

re: Unicode without UNICODE/_UNICODE?

Michael S. Kaplan — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 01:43:42 GMT

I have blogged many times about how the process of working on the MSLU project taught me that it is *much* more complicated than that.

re: Unicode without UNICODE/_UNICODE?

Dan Bishop — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 01:37:40 GMT

But aren't the "ANSI" functions just MultiByteToWideChar + call the corresponding "W" function + WideCharToMultiByte? And since the conversion functions DO support UTF-8, it should just be a matter of searching for hard-coded 2's in the "A" functions? Or is it more subtle than that?

re: Unicode without UNICODE/_UNICODE?

Michael S. Kaplan — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 01:27:24 GMT

This is not a core Notepad scenario that a typical Windows user ever would hit....

re: Unicode without UNICODE/_UNICODE?

Yuhong Bao — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 01:20:53 GMT

"Better for who?"

Better for users who have to open text files in various encodings.

re: Unicode without UNICODE/_UNICODE?

Michael S. Kaplan — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 00:34:02 GMT

The "ANSI" code path. Since no Windows "ANSI" code page is ever more than two bytes per "character", the assumption is valid for all intended cases. Of course this design limits options for making use of some code pages or UTF-8 as an ACP, it is as true design limitation, which was the point of this blog -- that there is no option to magically support a UTF-8 ACP.