[lldb-dev] Editline Rewrite : issues surround wide character handling on different platforms

[Zachary Turner]

If you're storing UTF8 anyway, why not just use regular character strings?
Doesn't it defeat the purpose of using UTF8 if you're combining it with a
character type that isn't 1 byte?

On Wed Oct 29 2014 at 11:27:29 AM Kate Stone <katherine_stone at apple.com>
wrote:

> On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:55 PM, Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue Oct 28 2014 at 1:46:26 PM Vince Harron <vharron at google.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> > - rework the Editline rewrite, so it either uses standard 8 bit chars,
>> or wchar_t/utf8 depending on the platform.  This would be conditionally
>> built depending on the platform.
>>
>> This would be my favorite option if possible.  wchar_t never really took
>> roots in Linux AFAIK.
>>
>
> Also probably the best option for Windows, although it's worth pointing
> out that at least for now, most other stuff in LLDB doesn't really use wide
> character strings either, so char would be the path of least resistance for
> Windows right now.
>
>
> With the Editline rewrite I made the explicit decision to insulate the
> rest of LLDB from wide characters and strings by encoding everything as
> UTF8.  I agree that reverting to char-only input is a perfectly reasonable
> solution for platforms that don't yet include wchar-aware libedit
> implementations.
>
> Kate Stone k8stone at apple.com
>  Xcode Runtime Analysis Tools
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20141029/6daaf43f/attachment.html>