Actually, that part where they won't run in Win9x anymore got me worried. Do you mean won't run _at all_, or just won't run UNICODE stuff properly.
We have a few people who use Windows 98 who will use your Harbour compiled .exe files. If you mean they won't run period, then maybe there could be a harbour.exe compiler switch? I dunno... Please let me know. On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 1:14 AM, Viktor Szakáts <harbour...@syenar.hu>wrote: > Hi All, > > I'd like to gather opinions on switching default Harbour > Windows builds to UNICODE mode in next major release. > > Advantages: > - Runs more efficiently on NT-class OSes since > we're using native API instead of ANSI wrappers, > and the OS-level CP conversion is saved also. > - Harbour level CP configuration is much easier for GTs. > - Will run even more efficiently when implementing > native UNICODE support inside HVM. > - Some languages can only be supported in UNICODE mode. > - We're in sync with all Harbour Windows builds and > also with WinCE builds, which already have UNICODE > enabled. > > Disadvantage: > - Apps won't run on Win9x OSes anymore. Here there > exists a solution, unicows lib: > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/goglobal/bb688166.aspx > > Notes: > - UNICODE is already enabled by default for > MSVC 2005 and upper, and WinCE. MSVC 2008 > and upper doesn't even support non-UNICODE > anymore. > - non-UNICODE can be enabled for custom Harbour > builds anytime using build-time option: > HB_BUILD_UNICODE=no. > > Opinions? > > Brgds, > Viktor > > _______________________________________________ > Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) > Harbour@harbour-project.org > http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour > -- smu johnson <smujohn...@gmail.com>
_______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
