Should we add overloads of the UTF8 conversion functions that accept wstrings?
In line with what rnk said, I'm curious about the implications of simply #undef'ing all the non A/W versions of functions so that you have to make the choice explicit On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 8:20 AM Reid Kleckner <r...@google.com> wrote: > rnk accepted this revision. > rnk added a comment. > This revision is now accepted and ready to land. > > Sure, this serves as a reminder that you should always convert from UTF-8 > to wide in Windows support code. I still think we should always explicitly > call the wide variants, and it seems like you agree. Defining these macros > is just a way to ensure we don't accidentally regress. > > Can you build asan with this change? I suspect it will be sensitive to it > because it wraps the win32 API directly rather than going through Support. > > > http://reviews.llvm.org/D21643 > > > >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
