At the risk of reviving a very quickly-quiet thread... I've still an
interest and have acquired some opinions around our software house.
On Thu, Nov 12, 1998 at 01:37:05PM +, Alan Cox wrote:
]Glibc is good, but what about wide char, unicode etc.. etc.. etc.. ad biggum.
] Glibc does wide
Okay, I just got a bit more info from our main locale-issues developer
(Jon Trulson):
The multi-byte functions *are* there in glibc. He knows they are there.
They just are not reliable enough, powerful enough, to stick with in our
new products. (i.e. setlocale() doesn't apparently do
You can guess what I'll say I suppose?
Glibc is good, but what about wide char, unicode etc.. etc.. etc.. ad biggum.
X is the main site where that is being taken care of (i.e. fonts, keymaps,
input managers for asia etc..).. and that is not now standard in any great
and good way, very
Glibc is good, but what about wide char, unicode etc.. etc.. etc.. ad biggum.
Glibc does wide char, ncurses seems to imply it does (I've not
checked yet).
toward. Is there any interest in what we have thus far at Xi?
Well I know the currnt KDE doesnt handle 16bit Glyphs, Im not sure about
4 matches
Mail list logo
