From: Peter W. <pet...@we...> - 2009-02-20 21:05:59
|
Kim Woelders schrieb: > > Yes. UCS-2 is used as internal encoding in this patch. It is what I > found all in all seemed to give best results. > It might be considered to use UCS-2BE internally to avoid some byte > swapping, but I got in trouble with that somewhere. > > I have a similar patch where the internal encoding is wchar_t and > mbstowcs/XwcDraw[Image]String/XFontSet are used. > I found it very hard if not impossible to select a proper font set. > Either I'm stupid or that just doesn't work properly. I hoped that maybe Xmb* or Xutf8* (maybe not very portable) functions could work. > > I'm fairly convinced that using UCS2 is fine for all practical > purposes and I think that implementing utf8 support at all is more > important than going for completeness and support for ancient whatnot :) That's true :). > > It could also be considered to use Xft, but again, I'm having trouble > selecting the font I want in stead of some silly antialised one. > However, there are reasons to try and get this right (the old X11 font > system kind of being on the road to deprecation). > > /Kim > Sorry my ignorance, I haven't imagined that it could be such complicated. And of course if you have to choose between "impossible" and "works for everyone", you should take the latter. :) Peter |