Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ccut!wnoc-tyo-news!cs.titech!titccy.cc.titech!necom830!mohta
From: mohta@necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp (Masataka Ohta)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: wchar_t values
Message-ID: <80@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp>
Date: 12 Apr 91 02:39:22 GMT
References: <1107@sranha.sra.co.jp> <71@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp> <1117@sranha.sra.co.jp> <78@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp> <1991Apr11.093836.10553@tkou02.enet.dec.com>
Sender: news@titccy.cc.titech.ac.jp
Organization: Tokyo Institute of Technology
Lines: 26

In article <1991Apr11.093836.10553@tkou02.enet.dec.com>
	diamond@jit345.enet@tkou02.enet.dec.com (Norman Diamond) writes:

>>How can you be codeset independent by having ISO C addendum about 10646?

>The same way you can be word-size independent and still specify minimum
>values.

The, the same way, we can introduce a new type, say, is10646char_t, without
losing codeset independence. That is, if standard translation functions
between 10646 and other code systems are provided, the entire system
is codeset independent in the same manner.

>Well, almost the same way.  It is still worth standardizing a
>translation scheme to be used WHEN the character set is 10646.

There is a problem, when a system with 16 bit wchar_t want to use 10646.

Is it required for a strictly conforming system to follow the scheme
WHENEVER the character set is 10646?

If so, it is somewhat codeset independent. If not so, there will be
systems using 10646 in the different way from the standarized scheme,
which means that the standard is not a standard.

						Masataka Ohta