On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 10:37:45 +0200 Michael Schnell <mschn...@lumino.de> wrote:
> On 08/21/2012 02:53 PM, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > > If the FCL moves to another string or starts enforcing an encoding the > > LCL has to be adapted. > > I believe if "String" becomes a sequence of 16 bit entities instead of 8 > bit entities, the LCL needs a really thorough rework. The UTF-8 optimized functions needs UTF-16 versions. But why do you mean it needs a "really thorough rework"? > In the Lazarus form some time ago I learned that there are supposed to > be decent arguments for keeping the LCL in 8 bit mode (speed with GUI > transactions in Linux) so the a move to 16 bit (or dynamically encoded) > strings is not intended. The LCL itself already has some widgetsets using UTF-16. Strings speed is almost no issue for the LCL itself. But many LCL applications and packages would suffer. Mattias _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
