[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ross Ridge) writes: > > I was not asking the general question, I was asking how it fails > > to conform wrt the particular technical issue at hand. > > Since GCC doesn't have any code that does (A), (B), or (C) it doesn't > place a burden on GCC to require it to do (B). That's sufficient to > answer the techinical issue at hand. While that implies GCC doesn't > conform, I said so explictly because Paul Eggert said that c99 is often > implemented using GCC.
I am the opposite of an expert on this topic. But in fact gcc does appear to have code related to (A), (B), and (C). I repeat those choices here from Paul's original e-mail: > A. Convert everything to UCNs in basic source characters as soon > as possible, that is, in translation phase 1. (This is what > C++ requires, apparently.) > > B. Use native encodings where possible, UCNs otherwise. > > C. Convert everything to wide characters as soon as possible > using an internal encoding that encompasses the entire source > character set and all UCNs. Now, see libcpp/charset.c. See the -finput-charset= option. To me that looks like code which does something related to (A), (B), or (C). Ian
