Re: Support for UTF-16 on Solaris
From: Thomas Maslen (maslen_at_pobox.com)
Date: 11/23/03
- Next message: Rich Teer: "Re: race on multi-processor solaris"
- Previous message: SenderX: "Re: race on multi-processor solaris"
- In reply to: mshetty: "Support for UTF-16 on Solaris"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 23 Nov 03 19:53:11 GMT
In <bfbb8fd4.0311202014.578610c8@posting.google.com> mshetty@mail.com (mshetty) writes:
[...]
> If I have a Client-Server application is it advisable to use UTF-16?.
> The platforms in question are Windows and Solaris.
On the whole, UTF-8 would be a much better choice, because (a) then you
don't have to worry about little-endian vs big-endian issues (whereas
with UTF-16 you have to generate and handle the Byte Order Mark), and
(b) UTF-8's upwards-compatibility from ASCII is awfully convenient,
whereas with UTF-16 you may find yourself having to reinvent the wheel.
About the only advantage of UTF-16 is the simple mapping to/from UCS-2,
which is interesting on Windows but probably less interesting on Solaris
(where, for instance, it may make sense to use UTF-8 as the native format).
Thomas Maslen
maslen@pobox.com
- Next message: Rich Teer: "Re: race on multi-processor solaris"
- Previous message: SenderX: "Re: race on multi-processor solaris"
- In reply to: mshetty: "Support for UTF-16 on Solaris"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
