On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 09:05:23PM +0200, Pim Blokland wrote: > Why is there no UTF-24?
Why? UTF-24 will almost invariably be larger then UTF-16, unless you are talking a document in Old Italic or Gothic. The math alphanumberic characters will almost always be combined with enough ASCII to make UTF-8 a win, and if not, enough BMP characters to make UTF-16 a win. Modern computers don't deal with 24 bit chunks well; in memory, they'd take up 32 bits a piece, unless you declared them packed, and then they'd be a lot slower then UTF-16 or UTF-32. And if you're storing to disk, you may as well use BOCU or SCSU (you're already going non-standard), or use standard compression with UTF-8, UTF-16, BOCU or SCSU. SCSU or BOCU compressed should take up half the space of UTF-24, if that. -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's the terror of knowing/What this world is about Watching some good friends/Screaming 'Let me out' -- Queen, "Under Pressure"
