On 24.04.2007 18:31, Jake Goulding wrote: > Brandon Casey wrote: >> It's hard for me to think of unicode as >> being low-level when it adds so much overhead to string handling. > > Isn't (a part of) the unicode handling needed for correctly processing > paths under Windows? As I remember it, Windows-native calls take either > ASCII or a slightly modified UTF-16LE (aka UCS-2). In order to be able > to have code that needs to open "strangely" named files on any platform, > at least a modicum of unicode support is needed. Yes, MultiByteToWideChar() see: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/intl/unicode_17si.asp
> Once you have that, > including gettext as a dependency seems straight-forward. > Not really, but having the iconv dependency was decided about six years ago: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2001-May/msg00219.html BTW: compared to the usual bandwidth and computer growth since that time the GLib growth was quite moderate (factor ten vs. factor two) Regards, Hans -------- Hans "at" Breuer "dot" Org ----------- Tell me what you need, and I'll tell you how to get along without it. -- Dilbert _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
