Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ccut!wnoc-tyo-news!sranha!srava!erik From: erik@srava.sra.co.jp (Erik M. van der Poel) Newsgroups: comp.std.c Subject: Re: wchar_t values Message-ID: <1131@sranha.sra.co.jp> Date: 12 Apr 91 06:18:49 GMT References: Sender: news@sranha.sra.co.jp Organization: Software Research Associates, Inc., Japan Lines: 22 Nntp-Posting-Host: srava Al Harkcom writes: > But my point was that if you have a single byte wide character using > all 255 characters, it would be a dsability to require that the multibyte > encoding and the wide character encoding be unequal. This does seem to be > relevant to this discussion... You're absolutely right, it is *relevant*. What I meant to say was that the C standard does not *require* characters other than those in the basic character set to follow the rule L'c' equals 'c'. > The numeric value of multibyte 'c' does > not have to equal the numeric value of wide character 'c' under ISO 10646. > You feel that this is a problem because you then become unable to use > such things as: ('c' == L'c') or ('c' == ((char )L'c'))... In a previous article, I already stated that I don't really care how we use 10646 in wchar_t, as long as everybody does it the same way. - -- Erik M. van der Poel erik@sra.co.jp Software Research Associates, Inc., Tokyo, Japan TEL +81-3-3234-2692