Re: [libxml++] Glib::ustring, lBoost Lib, and libstdc++

[Trappel M. <mar...@ks...>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: lib...@li...=20
> [mailto:lib...@li...]=20
> On Behalf Of Lo=EFc Joly
> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 6:14 PM
> To: lib...@li...
> Subject: Re: [libxml++] Glib::ustring, lBoost Lib, and libstdc++
>=20
> > De la part de Tom Browder
>=20
> > A couple of years ago I participated in a thread here discussing=20
> > decoupling libxml++'s dependency on the whole of Glib and friends.
> > Among other things discussed was possible substitutes for ustring.
> >=20
> > Now I've come back to ask if there has been any thought to=20
> proposing=20
> > that ustring be made a member of the Boost library (for possible=20
> > future incorporation into the C++ standard library).
>=20
> UTF8 string are certainly considered for the C++ standard.=20
> They would probably not look like Glib::ustring, however, but=20
> like an instanciation of basic_string with a specific=20
> char_trait. Here are last versions of the standard evolution=20
> papers about UTF8 support in the standard:
>=20
> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2295.
html (UTF8 litteral) http://www.open-> =
std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2149.html (UTF8=20
> char)=20
> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2238.
html (UTF8 in the SL)
>=20
> --
> Lo=EFc
>=20

Pfff ... Too me it seems it specifically hasn't been addressed:

[quote =
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2238.html]
(...) items are conspicuously missing from this paper: UTF-8 support, =
(...)
(...) One way to provide UTF-8 support would be a new string class whose =
interface is very different from basic_string, (...)
(...) Some form of UTF-8 support is important because there's an awful =
lot of real-world code that uses UTF-8 even internally, and programmers =
certainly need UTF-8 to interface with third-party libraries like =
libxml2. (...)
[/quote]


best regards / mit freundlichen Gr=FC=DFen,
Martin Trappel
=20