On Jun 23 17:04, Thomas Wolff wrote: > > I tested this myself and now I understand what you mean. The console > > seems to use ISO-8859-1, but actually it doesn't. What happens is this: > > The console I/O functions are using UTF-16 under the hood, so each > > incoming character is converted to Unicode. The ASCII->Unicode > > conversion treats all incoming bytes literally. Since the Unicode > > values from 0x80 to 0xff are derived from the ISO-8859-1 table, you > > actually see ISO-8859-1 by default on the console. > Understood; which means the effective codepage of the terminal is > ISO-8859-1 (by whatever mechanism this is achieved). Maybe wcwidth > etc. have a different opinion in this configuration (which I haven't > tested) which might however raise additional problems.
wcwidth for the "C" locale returns the standard non-CJK values. The return values for wcwidth only depend on language and the @cjknarrow modifier, not on the charset. > > So here's the question: Why is that a problem? It's just the default > > output. I *can't* use CP1252 as default, because it's only a valid > > default on western language versions of Windows. Rather I would have to > > use the defualt ANSI codepage, whatever that is on the machine. > OK, if that's how it was in 1.5, it would be fine. > > ISO-8859-1 OTOH is the least intrusive default since it allows a > > representation on all machines, independent of their default ANSI > > codepage. > The new approach is not a problem for me. I was just wondering about > compatibility issues and pondering that keeping the 1.5 default might > reduce the number of complaints from various users on this mailing list > later when 1.7 goes mainstream... Well, it's just the output codepage. The behaviour when using the alternate charset (for box chars) is still the same. Right now I can't think of a reason why this should lead to complaints. I guess I rather wait and see what exact problems people will get with this. > But wait - yet here's my question: Why is there a difference between > bash --login > and > bash > - where in the latter case CP1252 (or the default ANSI codepage) > *is* still the default? It's not different for me. I started bash --login as well as just bash right from the Windows start menu. The output is using ISO-8859-1 values (actually Unicode 0x20 - 0xff) in both cases. If it's really different for you, it would be helpful if you could debug this to find out why. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
