[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