On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Ivanko B <ivankob4m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Handling 1..4(6) bytes is less efficient than handling surrogate > *pairs*. > =============== > But surrogate pairs break array-like fast char access anyway, isn't it ?
It's also "broken" in UTF8 in the same way - so none of them gets +1 on this. UCS4 is the only real winner here (one dword for each character). > > _______________________________________________ > fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org > http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
