On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Marco van de Voort <mar...@stack.nl> wrote: > This is all undecided. I lean towards splitting operating system targets > into a utf8 and a utf16 one for most platforms(*), since nobody will ever > agree > on one encoding. Not even per platform. > > (*) and a legacy "ansi" one if need be.
Why do we need "targets"? Wouldn't it be better to simply duplicate all string functions for utf8 and utf16 and ansi if necessary? That was my idea from the start in case the new string was merged. For example: CompareText UTF8CompareText UTF16CompareText The versions with a fixed encoding could refer to a generic unicode version with undefined encoding. -- Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
