> Now that we're using C11, should we use char32_t for unicode code > points? > > Right now, we use pg_wchar for two purposes: > > 1. to abstract away some problems with wchar_t on platforms where > it's 16 bits; and > 2. hold unicode code point values > > In UTF8, they are are equivalent and can be freely cast back and forth, > but not necessarily in other encodings. That can be confusing in some > contexts. Attached is a patch to use char32_t for the second purpose. > > Both are equivalent to uint32, so there's no functional change and no > actual typechecking, it's just for readability. > > Is this helpful, or needless code churn?
Unless char32_t is solely used for the Unicode code point data, I think it would be better to define something like "pg_unicode" and use it instead of directly using char32_t because it would be cleaner for code readers. Best regards, -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS K.K. English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en/ Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
