On 5/14/06, Mattias Gaertner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The question is: should the LCL use the 'native' string type and let the
applications write three times the code. Or should the LCL use UTF-8 and map
internally in the interfaces and let the applications write once and compile
anywhere.
Today it uses native strings. Then people need to set strings by code,
and not using the IDE, and do something like this:
{$IFDEF LCLGtk2}
set utf-8 strings
{$ELSE}
set iso strings
{$ENDIF}
This isn't the end of the world, but is somewhat inconvenient.
To answer which system is better, it is necessary to compare the
overhead with the benefits.
It would be nice to calculate what exactly is the overhead produced by
the string conversion. Considering that you mostly set the strings of
your GUI only once, it probably isn't relevant for most uses.
--
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject
archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
