On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Patrick Gansterer wrote: > On Wed, 23 May 2012 14:16:48 +0200, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: >> >> * Daniel Veillard wrote: >>> >>> C.f. the bug Fix windows unicode build >>> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=638650 >>> >>> and the previous discussions here: >>> >>> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/xml/2008-February/msg00094.html >>> >>> now that the release is done, can we have a final decision on this. >>> As I understand it, LoadLibraryW takes a wchar_t* parameter, while >>> internally we are using only a char * (or xmlChar *) so it makes >>> no sense to try to call LoadLibraryW, and instead of using the >>> macro LoadLibrary which can only break build, calling LoadLibraryA >>> seems to be the simplest. >> >> >> It is not clear to me that building libxml2 with UNICODE defined is a >> sound idea if libxml2 is not designed for that > > > Since it's not designed for UNICODE builds it should ignore the UNICODE > define. But it doesn't at the moment, because the define is used indirectly > by LoadLibrary and GetProcAddress. > Ignoring would allow "UNICODE applications" which need to compile libxml2 in > their project too, adding the UNICODE define for the whole project and don't > need to undefine it for the libxml2 part.
How would that "ignore the UNICODE" work? Defining UNICODE will cause the API to do different things. -- Earnie -- https://sites.google.com/site/earnieboyd _______________________________________________ xml mailing list, project page http://xmlsoft.org/ xml@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/xml
