Greetings. On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 09:43:23 +0100 "Roberto E. Vargas Caballero" <k...@shike2.com> wrote: > > It is number of function calls, on cat dwm > > > > cat UTF-8-demo yields: > > utflen 113 > > utfencode 8152 > > utfdecode 198346 > > > > So I think only utfdecode need to be optimised if necessary. > > I also like the patch, so if nobody complaints about it then I will apply next > week.
The naming is wrong. It is just decoding »utf8« and can’t decode »utf16«. So: s,utf,utf8,g Sincerely, Christoph Lohmann
