Thread: [Audacity-devel] Unicode support
A free multi-track audio editor and recorder
Brought to you by:
aosiniao
From: Tuomas S. <th...@ut...> - 2005-02-05 17:38:37
|
Hi I'm using gtk2 version of wxWidgets with unicode support. Current stable version of Audacity (1.2.3) did not compile with it. Is there any plan to include unicode support in Audacity? If so, I would like to help. I've already made 1.2.3 unicode compatible and the change was quite trivial. (Mostly converting c-strings "xyz" to wxT("xyz")) It compiled and I haven't yet found problems with it. Only some fonts seemed too large, but same problem was with _original_ 1.2.3 when compiled with gtk2 (without unicode) version of wxWidgets. If you want to try, here is the patch: http://users.utu.fi/thsuut/audacity-1.2.3-unicode.diff.bz2 -- Tuomas Suutari | +358 50 3806983 | th...@ut... |
From: Tuomas S. <th...@ut...> - 2005-02-05 17:42:59
|
Hmm.. Kmail lost the body of my previous post.. strange.. Another try. :) Hi I'm using gtk2 version of wxWidgets with unicode support. Current stable version of Audacity (1.2.3) did not compile with it. Is there any plan to include unicode support in Audacity? If so, I would like to help. I've already made 1.2.3 unicode compatible and the change was quite trivial. (Mostly converting c-strings "xyz" to wxT("xyz")) It compiled and I haven't yet found problems with it. Only some fonts seemed too large, but same problem was with _original_ 1.2.3 when compiled with gtk2 (without unicode) version of wxWidgets. If you want to try, here is the patch: http://users.utu.fi/thsuut/audacity-1.2.3-unicode.diff.bz2 -- Tuomas Suutari | +358 50 3806983 | th...@ut... |
From: Matt B. <mbr...@cs...> - 2005-02-05 17:57:23
|
Tuomas Suutari wrote: > Is there any plan to include unicode support in Audacity? If so, I > would like to help. Yes, we'd love to make Audacity unicode-compatible. > I've already made 1.2.3 unicode compatible and the change was quite > trivial. Wow, thanks! Would you be willing to do the same for Audacity 1.3 (the current CVS trunk version)? I'd prefer not to commit such a big change to the stable 1.2 branch, but it would be great to have this in the next development version. Most of the code hasn't changed too much; you should be able to partially apply your 1.2.3 patch, and then update as needed for Audacity 1.3. I'm very impressed at the amount of work that went into this. I started working on this once, but I didn't get very far before losing steam. :) |
From: Tuomas S. <th...@ut...> - 2005-02-05 18:25:17
|
On Saturday February 5 2005 19:57, Matt Brubeck wrote: > Wow, thanks! Would you be willing to do the same for Audacity 1.3 > (the current CVS trunk version)? I can try. I'm just not so familiar with CVS. Getting the sources was easy, but I don't know about commiting my changes back. This will need some user account or something? > I'd prefer not to commit such a big change to the stable 1.2 branch, > but it would be great to have this in the next development version. Actually change isn't really so big. Those wxT-macros substitute to nothing in pre-processing, if wxWidgets is non-unicode version. However it's safer to leave stable branch alone. -- Tuomas Suutari | +358 50 3806983 | th...@ut... |
From: Matt B. <mbr...@cs...> - 2005-02-05 18:33:25
|
Tuomas Suutari wrote: > I can try. I'm just not so familiar with CVS. Getting the sources was > easy, but I don't know about commiting my changes back. This will need > some user account or something? You can use the "cvs diff" command to output a patch that you can mail to us. ("cvs diff" accepts most of the same options as the normal "diff" command.) If you become a regular contributor, you can create a SourceForge account and we can give you access to commit changes to CVS yourself. > Actually change isn't really so big. Those wxT-macros substitute to > nothing in pre-processing, if wxWidgets is non-unicode version. > However it's safer to leave stable branch alone. I might eventually apply this to the stable branch, after it's been tested for a while. But either way, we will definitely need to port it to the CVS trunk also. |
From: Markus M. <me...@me...> - 2005-02-06 20:02:22
|
Matt Brubeck schrieb: >Tuomas Suutari wrote: > > >>I can try. I'm just not so familiar with CVS. Getting the sources was >>easy, but I don't know about commiting my changes back. This will need >>some user account or something? >> >> > >You can use the "cvs diff" command to output a patch that you can mail >to us. ("cvs diff" accepts most of the same options as the normal >"diff" command.) > >If you become a regular contributor, you can create a SourceForge >account and we can give you access to commit changes to CVS yourself. > > Actually, the best command to execute would be cvs diff -u > patch.txt executed while in the "audacity/src/" directory of your CVS download Then just send 'patch.txt' to us and we can apply your changes to the main repository in a second. Markus |
From: Tuomas S. <th...@ut...> - 2005-02-07 12:02:07
|
http://users.utu.fi/thsuut/audacity-cvs-20050207-unicode.diff.bz2 -- Tuomas Suutari | +358 50 3806983 | th...@ut... |
From: Matt B. <mbr...@cs...> - 2005-02-08 05:17:32
|
Tuomas Suutari wrote: > http://users.utu.fi/thsuut/audacity-cvs-20050207-unicode.diff.bz2 Applied to CVS HEAD. Thanks again! I haven't tested this with a Unicode build yet, but it works fine with non-Unicode wxGTK 2.4. I tried compiling against wxGTK 2.5.3 (unicode, gtk2), but got some unrelated errors. It looks like they should be easy to fix as soon as I have time. |
From: Matt B. <mbr...@cs...> - 2005-02-08 14:51:49
|
Matt Brubeck wrote: > I tried compiling against wxGTK 2.5.3 (unicode, gtk2), but got some > unrelated errors. It looks like they should be easy to fix as soon as > I have time. These are now fixed. Audacity is running great with the latest wxGTK 2.5 unicode package from Debian "sid." |
From: Dominic M. <do...@au...> - 2005-02-09 04:53:20
|
Thanks to both of you. Tuomas, I read over your notes and will try to follow those conventions from now on (in the CVS HEAD). The only thing I'm unclear on is what we're supposed to do with unicode strings that are supposed to be marked for translation. I just re-read the wx notes, and it sure looks like _("translate me") is the right thing to do. Your notes seem to imply we should be using wxT, or else I didn't understand them. - Dominic On Feb 8, 2005, at 6:51 AM, Matt Brubeck wrote: > Matt Brubeck wrote: > >> I tried compiling against wxGTK 2.5.3 (unicode, gtk2), but got some >> unrelated errors. It looks like they should be easy to fix as soon as >> I have time. > > These are now fixed. Audacity is running great with the latest wxGTK > 2.5 unicode package from Debian "sid." > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide > Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real > users. > Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click > _______________________________________________ > Audacity-devel mailing list > Aud...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-devel |
From: Lynn A. <l_d...@ad...> - 2005-02-09 07:00:14
|
I think I'm missing something ... I want to be able to do something like convert a 22050 stereo file to 11025 mono. I don't see how to do that from within Audacity 1.3.0. I'm pretty sure (but not positive) that I compiled with pretty much everything in configwin.h defined: // Microsoft Windows specific include file #define MP3SUPPORT 1 #define USE_LADSPA 1 #define USE_LIBID3TAG 1 #define USE_LIBMAD 1 #define USE_LIBRESAMPLE 1 #define USE_LIBSAMPLERATE 1 #define USE_LIBVORBIS 1 #define USE_NYQUIST 1 #define USE_PORTMIXER 1 #define USE_SOUNDTOUCH 1 #undef USE_VST #define INSTALL_PREFIX "." #define rint(x) (floor((x)+0.5f)) // arch-tag: dcb2defc-1c07-4bae-a9ca-c5377cb470e4 I don't see any menu item or "widget" to convert the samplerate. I can change from 22050 to something like 16000 or 11025, but that just slows down the speaking. I don't see any menu item or "widget" to convert to mono. Would I have to change the sample rate and then speed up the pitch and/or tempo proportionally? That would seem odd, but ... I looked thru the archives, and didn't find this asked. Related question ... when I've saving a .mp3 file, how do I specify I want 16 kbps rather than 20, 24, 32, etc.? |
From: Dominic M. <do...@au...> - 2005-02-09 07:28:52
|
On Feb 8, 2005, at 10:58 PM, Lynn Allan wrote: > I think I'm missing something ... > > I want to be able to do something like convert a 22050 stereo file to > 11025 mono. I don't see how to do that from within Audacity 1.3.0. In Audacity, there is a single "project rate" that everything gets resampled to automatically, but then every track can have its own sample rate independent of this. Resampling always happens on the fly, not explicitly. The "project rate" is controlled by the pop-up menu in the lower-left corner of the window. That is the rate that is used for playback, recording, and exporting. Your tracks can be at a different sample rate - changing the track's sample rate changes how that track is interpreted, but leaves the project sample rate alone. So if you change the project sample rate (lower-left corner) to 11025, it is automatically resampled to 11025 when you play, and when you export it as a WAV or something else. To convert to mono, use the track's pop-up menu to split the stereo track. Then either set both tracks to mono, or else delete one. This is definitely confusing, and I'd be happy if somebody wanted to add a "Change sample rate..." option somewhere. But the UI is harder than it looks...what would you do if given a project with multiple mixed sample rates? The current system, while a little harder to grasp at first, is quite powerful and flexible, and consistent with itself once you understand it. > Related question ... when I've saving a .mp3 file, how do I specify I > want 16 kbps rather than 20, 24, 32, etc.? In the preferences, under "File Formats". By the way, is it worth saving an MP3 as 11 KHz AND with a small bitrate? In other words, does 11 KHz, 32 kbps actually save any space over 44 KHz, 32 kbps, or sound any better? I would think they'd be the same size, so you may as well stick with the better sample rate if you're saving as an MP3... - Dominic |
From: Lynn A. <l_d...@ad...> - 2005-02-09 15:29:18
|
> The "project rate" is controlled by the pop-up menu in the lower-left > corner of the window. That is the rate that is used for playback, > recording, and exporting. Your tracks can be at a different sample > rate - changing the track's sample rate changes how that track is > interpreted, but leaves the project sample rate alone. THANKS! I completely overlooked that ... I didn't really notice the widget in the status area .. and then thought it was read-only. Does this cause the mDirty flag to be set (WaveTrack and/or WaveClip and/or project) and PushState to happen? Should it? I found and stepped through the AStatus::OnRate11 handler. I was expecting that this would trigger a "Save" flag at exit, but I was allowed to exit without the "Save" dialog. Also curious ... why is the 16000 option greyed out? 8000 is available. > To convert to mono, use the track's pop-up menu to split the stereo > track. Then either set both tracks to mono, or else delete one. I'm unclear ... let's say I have a stereo track with rather extreme stereo separation. The person on the left counts to ten into the left microphone. The person on the right counts from eleven to twenty into the right microphone. I want to merge these into a mono track (counting from one to twenty). Can I do this directly? Indirectly? Does this involved "cut/paste"? > This is definitely confusing, and I'd be happy if somebody wanted to > add a "Change sample rate..." option somewhere. But the UI is harder > than it looks...what would you do if given a project with multiple > mixed sample rates? The current system, while a little harder to grasp > at first, is quite powerful and flexible, and consistent with itself > once you understand it. My naive impression is that "CleanSpeech" can do this rather easily ... since it pretty much assumes mono speech. "Accept no substitutes" <g>. I suppose a menu item could be implemented, but stay greyed out (disabled) if the tracks had different sampling rates. My naive impression is that the majority of recordings would have the same sampling rate, so Audacity might consider allowing this ... a relatively smart menu item would trigger a "blunt instrument approach". Am I missing something? Has this been discussed at length before? I can try to implement this if it would help Audacity. It's kind of a "non issue" for "CleanSpeech". <alert comment="aside"> I am regularly struck by the differences between my use of Audacity and a real audio engineer. It just never occurred to me that different tracks would have different sample rates. My orientation is to facilitate end-users loading a mono track, trimming some material from the start and finish, hitting the "Prepare" button, and being done with it. One down, twenty to go. They are typically busy volunteers who aren't necessarily all that computer literate, and working with older, donated computers. They may not know bit-rate from back-rub. The original sound source may be be practically retched ... recorded with donated hobby microphones and donated cassette decks. The speaker is alternatively shouting or whispering to put a dramatic flair on his/her material, so the actual s/n can be pretty minimal in places. The hum/hiss/noise "baseline" can be at -25db, and that's not worst case, just below average audio quality for some church recordings. Noise at -30db is fairly typical. Many churches seem to use under-recorded settings so the "red light" never comes on, so the typical "local peak" signal is only -10db or less. This might be the extent of their "audio engineer" training: "When the next-to-last song is getting about done, hit the "Record" button. Try to pay enough attention to turn the tape over if the sermon goes longer than 45 minutes. When the closing song starts, hit the "Stop" button. Don't touch the recording level knob." </alert> > > Related question ... when I've saving a .mp3 file, how do I specify I > > want 16 kbps rather than 20, 24, 32, etc.? > > In the preferences, under "File Formats". > > By the way, is it worth saving an MP3 as 11 KHz AND with a small > bitrate? In other words, does 11 KHz, 32 kbps actually save any space > over 44 KHz, 32 kbps, or sound any better? I would think they'd be the > same size, so you may as well stick with the better sample rate if > you're saving as an MP3... <alert comment="newbie non-audio engineer"> I'm unclear on this ... IANAAE ... I am not an audio engineer ... not even close ... only barely aware of what rms means (actually fuzzy) For speech, 16kbps is plenty and keeps the file size down (I think ... may be confused here). My impression is that 11025 sampling rate (sr) is preferred over 16000 sr or 22050 sr, but I don't know why for sure ... and I may be mistaken. It seems like the file sizes end up the same, however, when I've checked. When you specify 16kbps to the mp3 encoder, are you indicating ... "do the best you can, but it has to fit into a file that is only 2KB per second" ... 10 seconds has to fit in 20KB. When you specify 11025, is this indicating that frequencies over (11025 / 2) = 5512.5hz can be ignored? Does specification of 16000 indicate that frequencies up to 8000hz need to be factored in ... but there probably isn't much signal "up there"? Seems like the job of the mp3 encoder is enhanced and it can do a better job with speech if it knows to ignore high frequencies, but I am very ignorant in this respect. I suppose I should investigate on my own and not embarass myself by my ignorance. </alert> |
From: Richard A. <ri...@au...> - 2005-02-09 20:07:23
|
On Wed, 2005-02-09 at 08:27 -0700, Lynn Allan wrote: > Does this cause the mDirty flag to be set (WaveTrack and/or WaveClip > and/or project) and PushState to happen? Should it? I found and > stepped through the AStatus::OnRate11 handler. I was expecting that > this would trigger a "Save" flag at exit, but I was allowed to exit > without the "Save" dialog. You're right, opening a project, changing the rate and saving doesn't force a save prompt. As all you would be saving is the setting of the control, it's not a big pain. However, as the state is saved when you hit save, I suppose it ought to cause a prompt. > Also curious ... why is the 16000 option greyed out? 8000 is > available. I think the options available are the sample rates supported by the sound card for playback. I agree it is a bit odd to link the sample rates for playback to the export rates, but this is certainly true in 1.2.x > I'm unclear ... let's say I have a stereo track with rather extreme > stereo separation. The person on the left counts to ten into the left > microphone. The person on the right counts from eleven to twenty into > the right microphone. I want to merge these into a mono track > (counting from one to twenty). Can I do this directly? Indirectly? Split the stereo track to two mono ones, then on each track's pop-down menu, change the mode from "left" or "right" to "mono". When you export the file, you will get both tracks mixed together. > I suppose a menu item could be implemented, but stay greyed out > (disabled) if the tracks had different sampling rates. My naive > impression is that the majority of recordings would have the same > sampling rate, so Audacity might consider allowing this ... a > relatively smart menu item would trigger a "blunt instrument > approach". The problem is that the majority of people looking for a sample rate conversion function will want it because they have a mixture of sample rates in the project. > > By the way, is it worth saving an MP3 as 11 KHz AND with a small > > bitrate? In other words, does 11 KHz, 32 kbps actually save any > > space over 44 KHz, 32 kbps, or sound any better? I would think they'd be > > the same size, so you may as well stick with the better sample rate if > > you're saving as an MP3... > For speech, 16kbps is plenty and keeps the file size down (I think ... > may be confused here). My impression is that 11025 sampling rate (sr) > is preferred over 16000 sr or 22050 sr, but I don't know why for sure > ... and I may be mistaken. It seems like the file sizes end up the > same, however, when I've checked. > > When you specify 16kbps to the mp3 encoder, are you indicating ... "do > the best you can, but it has to fit into a file that is only 2KB per > second" ... 10 seconds has to fit in 20KB. When you specify 11025, is > this indicating that frequencies over (11025 / 2) = 5512.5hz can be > ignored? Does specification of 16000 indicate that frequencies up to > 8000hz need to be factored in ... but there probably isn't much signal > "up there"? Seems like the job of the mp3 encoder is enhanced and it > can do a better job with speech if it knows to ignore high > frequencies, but I am very ignorant in this respect. Lynn is right to think that lowering the sample rate (and hence removing the HF content) makes the process of MP3 encoding easier, and indeed LAME does it's own down-sampling of audio when a low bitrate is requested on full sample rate material, so get the best results from the encoder (i.e. limited bandwidth sounds nicer than wider bandwidth but a lot of artifacts) So it is still a moot point whether getting audacity to down-sample the audio is productive or not, although it should give more control over the final sample rate. 11025Hz has an advantage that it is 1/4 of 44100Hz, and so simpler to do the conversion than a non-integer conversion like 44100 to 16000. Having said that, 5kHz is a pretty low cutoff frequency from the point of view of getting good speech reproduction - the ear is most sensitive around 2-4kHz, so at 11025Hz the quality is no better than telephone quality. Richard Ash |
From: Lynn A. <l_d...@ad...> - 2005-02-10 14:26:08
|
> Having said that, 5kHz is a pretty low cutoff frequency from the point > of view of getting good speech reproduction - the ear is most sensitive > around 2-4kHz, so at 11025Hz the quality is no better than telephone > quality. From my (very limited) experience, using the 11025 sampling rate with 16kbps to get 5.5kHz frequency range is fine. AM radio quality is more than acceptable ... the expectation is only than the voice is more or less recognizable ... be able to tell whether the speaker is Dan Rather, Peter Jennings, or Dan Brokaw ... but not whether they have a cold and are speaking more "nasally" than usual. From "About" http://broadcastengineering.com/aps/measure/broadcasting_audio_sampling/ Telephone audio signals with a maximum frequency of about 3.4 kHz are sampled at 8 kHz. |
From: Matt B. <mbr...@cs...> - 2005-02-09 20:41:00
|
Dominic Mazzoni wrote: > By the way, is it worth saving an MP3 as 11 KHz AND with a small > bitrate? In other words, does 11 KHz, 32 kbps actually save any space > over 44 KHz, 32 kbps, or sound any better? I would think they'd be > the same size, so you may as well stick with the better sample rate if > you're saving as an MP3... With the default LAME settings (which Audacity uses), LAME actually chooses the best sample frequency for the selected bit rate, and then resamples the audio before encoding it. If you choose a low enough bit rate, then all of your MP3 files will be resampled to 22 KHz (or whatever), no matter what your Audacity project rate or track rates are. |
From: Lynn A. <l_d...@ad...> - 2005-02-10 14:53:49
|
> > Related question ... when I've saving a .mp3 file, how do I specify I > > want 16 kbps rather than 20, 24, 32, etc.? > > In the preferences, under "File Formats". So this will be a preference for saving this file, and for all subsequent saving, not just this specific file? Just checking. |
From: Vaughan J. <va...@au...> - 2005-04-30 20:56:46
|
Matt, this is what I was recalling about Unicode. Are we there yet, i.e., should I build wxWidgets 2.6.0 for Windows with Unicode? Thx, Vaughan Matt Brubeck wrote: >Tuomas Suutari wrote: > > > >>http://users.utu.fi/thsuut/audacity-cvs-20050207-unicode.diff.bz2 >> >> > >Applied to CVS HEAD. Thanks again! > >I haven't tested this with a Unicode build yet, but it works fine with >non-Unicode wxGTK 2.4. > >I tried compiling against wxGTK 2.5.3 (unicode, gtk2), but got some >unrelated errors. It looks like they should be easy to fix as soon as I >have time. > > > > |
From: Matt B. <mbr...@cs...> - 2005-05-01 16:28:38
|
Vaughan Johnson wrote: > Matt, this is what I was recalling about Unicode. Are we there yet, > i.e., should I build wxWidgets 2.6.0 for Windows with Unicode? You should be able to compile wxWidgets in Unicode mode (with Audacity 1.3), but it's not an urgent change, since I don't think we really take advantage of Unicode yet. (The Unicode support is more important on Linux, where users often have wx/Unicode libraries preinstalled by their distributions.) |
From: Vaughan J. <va...@au...> - 2005-05-03 00:22:42
|
Matt Brubeck wrote: >Vaughan Johnson wrote: > > > >>Matt, this is what I was recalling about Unicode. Are we there yet, >>i.e., should I build wxWidgets 2.6.0 for Windows with Unicode? >> >> > >You should be able to compile wxWidgets in Unicode mode (with Audacity >1.3), but it's not an urgent change, since I don't think we really take >advantage of Unicode yet. (The Unicode support is more important on >Linux, where users often have wx/Unicode libraries preinstalled by their >distributions.) > > > Thanks, Matt. For now, I've checked in to HEAD an Audacity VC7 project file that builds with wxWidgets 2.6.0 Debug & Release, so we're set for that regarding releasing 1.3.0. I think I'll add additional configurations for Audacity Unicode, so there's a choice. I'm thinking I should check in the wxWidgets 2.6.0 for VC7 project files I made, because they've become much more numerous, and we have to modify what they release anyway. Where's a good place to put them in the Audacity CVS, in lib-src? -Vaughan |
From: Alexandre P. <ale...@gm...> - 2005-05-15 20:47:23
|
On 5/1/05, Vaughan Johnson <va...@au...> wrote: > Matt, this is what I was recalling about Unicode. Are we there yet, > i.e., should I build wxWidgets 2.6.0 for Windows with Unicode? At least Languages.cpp should be recoded to UTF-8, because CVS fails to be built against wxWidgets compile with --enable-unicode. Alexandre |
From: Vaughan J. <va...@au...> - 2005-06-08 01:30:51
|
Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: >On 5/1/05, Vaughan Johnson <va...@au...> wrote: > > >>Matt, this is what I was recalling about Unicode. Are we there yet, >>i.e., should I build wxWidgets 2.6.0 for Windows with Unicode? >> >> > >At least Languages.cpp should be recoded to UTF-8, because CVS fails >to be built against wxWidgets compile with --enable-unicode. > >Alexandre > > > I've just about got this working, but have a question. Most of the compile errors I get are trying to build Unicode with concatenated string parameters, e.g., wxMessageBox(wxString::Format(_(_("Could not save project. " "Perhaps %s is not writeable,\n" "or the disk is full."), project.c_str()), _("Error saving project"), wxOK | wxCENTRE, this); It will compile if I put the concatenated string all on one line: wxMessageBox(wxString::Format(_("Could not save project. Perhaps %s is not writeable,\nor the disk is full."), project.c_str()), _("Error saving project"), wxOK | wxCENTRE, this); Or if I explicitly concatenate: wxMessageBox(wxString::Format(_(_("Could not save project. ") + _("Perhaps %s is not writeable,\n") + _("or the disk is full.")), project.c_str()), _("Error saving project"), wxOK | wxCENTRE, this); There are a number of these. Any preferences or better suggestions? Thanks, Vaughan |
From: Tuomas S. <th...@ut...> - 2005-02-08 11:51:44
Attachments:
wxWidgets-unicode-notes.txt
|
On Tuesday February 8 2005 07:17, Matt Brubeck wrote: > I tried compiling against wxGTK 2.5.3 (unicode, gtk2), but got some > unrelated errors. It looks like they should be easy to fix as soon > as I have time. Yep. I noticed that too. Commenting out these two lines helped: ToolBar.cpp line 470 widgets/ASlider.cpp line 177 Of course that's not a correct solution, but helped me to test it with wxGTK 2.5 (gtk2+unicode). ps. To help adding new code without breaking unicode compatibility I've include a text file with few notes about the subject. -- Tuomas Suutari | +358 50 3806983 | th...@ut... |
From: Tuomas S. <th...@ut...> - 2005-02-09 09:43:29
|
On Wednesday February 9 2005 06:53, Dominic Mazzoni wrote: > The only thing I'm unclear on is what we're supposed to do with > unicode strings that are supposed to be marked for translation. I > just re-read the wx notes, and it sure looks like _("translate me") > is the right thing to do. Your notes seem to imply we should be > using wxT, or else I didn't understand them. Oops.. My notes were confusing there. :P My point was that _("translate me") strings should not be converted to wxT(".."), _(wxT("..")) or wxT(_("..")). _()-macro already does the conversion to wxChar, so _("translate me") is already correct. More info at: http://www.wxwidgets.org/manuals/2.5.3/wx_unicode.html -- Tuomas Suutari | +358 50 3806983 | th...@ut... |