[Development] char8_t summary?

Thiago Macieira thiago.macieira at intel.com
Thu Jul 11 03:20:16 CEST 2019


On Wednesday, 10 July 2019 22:01:04 -03 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On Wednesday, 10 July 2019 09:55:02 -03 André Pönitz wrote:
> > As far as I understand there's a perceived need to have "full" utf8
> > literals, and there's a need to have ASCII literals. First could be
> > served by some QUtf8*, second by QAscii*, both additions, no need to
> > change QLatin* semantics.
> 
> ASCII = Latin1

In the sense that the class holding ASCII should be the Latin1 class, for the 
reasons that Marc presented. It's actually faster to convert from Latin1 to 
UTF-16 than from US-ASCII to UTF-16 (unless we declare out-of-bounds US-ASCII 
UB).

The only issue is what to do with the transforming functions toUpper and 
toLower.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel System Software Products





More information about the Development mailing list