On 11/11/11 7:24 AM, "ext Giuseppe D'Angelo" <dange...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 11 November 2011 12:32, Robin Burchell <robin...@viroteck.net> wrote: >> hi, >> >> On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 1:10 PM, <lars.kn...@nokia.com> wrote: >>> Our main issue seem to be timing then. We currently have the >>>opportunity >>> of changing API to some extend before we freeze down things for Qt 5 >>> again. Thus we'd need something relatively soon to be able to use it >>>for >>> 5.0. >> >> hmm, what stops us from moving QRegExp to an addon (somehow - how are >> we going to do this e.g. with the methods in QString?) and introducing >> new regular expressions support later? I guess it's a bit of an >> inconvenience, but it avoids slipping everything for one feature > >_IF_ a consensus s reached upon going with PCRE, would it be possible >to make a new class (... set of classes) using the UTF-8 engine, and >upgrade it later to the UTF-16 version -- thus, getting all the >benefits? Yes, the implementation based on UTF-8 vs UTF-16 version of PCRE would only differ on two lines, the UTF-16 -> UTF-8 and UTF-8 > UTF-16 conversion before and after the matching. I suggest we get started on this with the current version of PCRE, and hope that entices the PCRE team to work on a proper UTF-16 implementation. Anyone interesting in jumping on this task? -- .marius _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
