On Fri, Sep 13, 2002 at 12:02:29PM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote:
Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> writes:
> I'm not suggesting reading wchar_t's from the target; that's not
> terribly useful a thing to do. You _want_ the host wchar_t. It is
> a host type capable of holding a wide character; the type changes
> based on platform and on whether or not the platform actually has
> wide character support.
If you're suggesting using the host's wchar_t to hold characters after
conversion from the target charset to the host charset, then I'm with
you.
If you're suggesting using the host's wchar_t to hold character values
that have been read from the target, but not yet converted to the
host's charset, then I really disagree. The target's wchar_t could be
32 bits, while the host's might be 16 bits.
Precisely. I was suggesting using host wchar_t after conversion to
host format.