Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 07:43:57PM +0100, Joost Verburg wrote:
Basically the utf8 -> utf16 -> ucs4 version does two conversion that
could be collapsed into a single one. The code itself is fairly simple,
so most time spend is indeed 'touching' data.
See http://www.unicode.or
On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 07:43:57PM +0100, Joost Verburg wrote:
>> Basically the utf8 -> utf16 -> ucs4 version does two conversion that
>> could be collapsed into a single one. The code itself is fairly simple,
>> so most time spend is indeed 'touching' data.
>
> See http://www.unicode.org/Public/PR
Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 02:26:40PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 12:11:14AM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Actually, even on
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 02:26:40PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Quoting Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 12:11:14AM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> > > Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > >> Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> Actu
Quoting Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 12:11:14AM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> > Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >> Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Actually, even on Unix I expect things to be faster if we use QString
> >>> instead of
Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 07:18:23PM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
I would do a few benchmarks if I knew what to test. Could you setup a
minimal test.cpp for me?
I think I can manage that myself after all ;-)
Well, you can also use this patch and tell me if buffer saving/loa
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 07:18:23PM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> I would do a few benchmarks if I knew what to test. Could you setup a
> minimal test.cpp for me?
I think I can manage that myself after all ;-)
Andre'
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 11:59:42PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Actually, even on Unix I expect things to be faster if we use QString
> > instead of iconv. Just look at the mess that this library forces on us
> > (IconvProcessor and co).
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 11:55:23PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Andre Poenitz wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 06:36:38PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Windows-based developers,
>>>
>>> I had the occasion to use LyX on Linux and I noticed that loading files
>>> is quicker th
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Actually, even on Unix I expect things to be faster if we use QString
instead of iconv. Just look at the mess that this library forces on us
(IconvProcessor and co). I'd be very much in favor of doing that, if
only for
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Actually, even on Unix I expect things to be faster if we use QString
> instead of iconv. Just look at the mess that this library forces on us
> (IconvProcessor and co). I'd be very much in favor of doing that, if
> only for the code reduction (basic
Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 06:36:38PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Dear Windows-based developers,
I had the occasion to use LyX on Linux and I noticed that loading files is
quicker there. I think the culprit is the GnuWin32 iconv library and I
stumbled across this:
h
Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 06:36:38PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Dear Windows-based developers,
I had the occasion to use LyX on Linux and I noticed that loading files is
quicker there. I think the culprit is the GnuWin32 iconv library and I
stumbled across this:
h
Peter Kümmel wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Dear Windows-based developers,
I had the occasion to use LyX on Linux and I noticed that loading
files is quicker there. I think the culprit is the GnuWin32 iconv
library and I stumbled across this:
http://groups.google.com/group/vim_multibyte/br
Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 06:36:38PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Dear Windows-based developers,
I had the occasion to use LyX on Linux and I noticed that loading files is
quicker there. I think the culprit is the GnuWin32 iconv library and I
stumbled across this:
http
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Dear Windows-based developers,
I had the occasion to use LyX on Linux and I noticed that loading
files is quicker there. I think the culprit is the GnuWin32 iconv
library and I stumbled across this:
http://groups.google.com/group/vim_multiby
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
I had the occasion to use LyX on Linux and I noticed that loading files
is quicker there. I think the culprit is the GnuWin32 iconv library and
I stumbled across this:
http://groups.google.com/group/vim_multibyte/browse_thread/thread/758d3b013d2cf99a
This is already
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 06:36:38PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Dear Windows-based developers,
>
> I had the occasion to use LyX on Linux and I noticed that loading files is
> quicker there. I think the culprit is the GnuWin32 iconv library and I
> stumbled across this:
>
> http://groups.goo
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Dear Windows-based developers,
I had the occasion to use LyX on Linux and I noticed that loading files
is quicker there. I think the culprit is the GnuWin32 iconv library and
I stumbled across this:
http://groups.google.com/group/vim_multibyte/browse_thread/thread/75
19 matches
Mail list logo
