On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 01:07:10PM -0500, Strake wrote: > On 24/12/2013, Silvan Jegen <s.je...@gmail.com> wrote: > > So I guess the question boils down to whether you would rather use > > libutf or the standardized, POSIX-locale-dependent wchar.h functions for > > the UTF-8 conversion. I see one advantage of the wchar.h functions: > > If we use them we could avoid adding an external dependency to > > sbase. The disadvantage is the fact that we would depend on the > > whole posix-locale-thing which seems unnecessarily complicated in > > places. > > Use wchar.h functions and a sane libc, e.g. musl, which has a pure > UTF-8 C locale, which ISO C explicitly allows [1].
How does this play out in terms of portability on say *BSD systems? Would be nice to use wchar.h for all of this to avoid dragging in more code into sbase.
