[Development] char8_t summary?
apoenitz at t-online.de
Thu Jul 11 10:13:33 CEST 2019
On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:01:04PM -0300, 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
bool = char ?
circle = ellipse ?
It's a subset, it is special enough to be called by its name. Especially
if it has features (e.g. toUpper/toLower operating on single letters) that
are not present in the larger set.
The line of discussion here is
- people (correctly, happily) use toUpper on (7-bit clean US-ASCII) data
- ASCII is claimed to be identical to Latin1
- since it is identical it is superfluous to have both and ASCII is dropped
- toUpper does not work per-char for Latin1 in corner cases
- so it needs to be dropped "to avoid wrong use"
In the end this deprives users from a useful tool in a scenario where it
was perfectly fine to use.
More information about the Development