Re: Latest on CITEXT 2.0

On 7/1/08, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "Marko Kreen" <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > ATM I'm looking at str_tolower/upper internal implementation.
> > They do:
> > workspace[curr_char] = towlower(workspace[curr_char]);
> > where workspace is wchar_t but towlower() operates on wint_t.
>
> IIRC this is exactly comparable to the type situation for the
> traditional <ctype.h> macros. The reason is that they are defined
> to accept EOF in addition to actual char (or wchar) values.

I read SUS v3 and there is no hint on multi-wchar anything,
so for unix systems you are right, wint_t == wchar_t.

Seems stories how Windows and Java operate have affected me too much.

Then I browsed MSDN:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dtxesf6k.aspx

and they seem to strongly hint that wchar_t == 16 bits and
UTF-16 is used internally.

Probably some Windows developer should look into it
and decide if there is a #ifdef WIN32 branch needed.

--
marko