I am afraid the problem is still there - hidden behind the functions and wrappers and makes the UTF-8 perform poorly compared to UCS2. The libc/Qt/whatever code will still have to do the nasty things I mentioned previously behind the scenes leading to performance/clarity/design inferiority.
There is just one big reason for UTF-8 - the ASCII compatibility. The rest is all disadvantages. Anyway, UTF-8 is better then nothing (ISO-88x) and there is a big friction of the ASCII Internet/world to changing things drastically. I would not dare to call UTF8 a modern system - it is a trade off between having UNICODE and the old ASCII at the same time and it is payed for by implementation uggliness and complexity. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 3:57 PM > To: Žáček Kryštof; debian-user@lists.debian.org > Subject: Re: moving to unicode > > ?á?ek Kry?tof wrote: > > I just second this. Only IMO the UCS2 (fixed two bytes per > character) would be much more appropriate to a modern UNICODE > system. The variable length (2 to 3 bytes ) UTF-8 encoding > can marginally save some space (depending on language) but > introduces nasty overhead to character handling - even the > most trivial string functions have to check for character > boundaries (e.g. even detecting the string length itself is > not a trivial operation in UTF-8 !!! or having a fixed length > buffer you can never tell in advance how many characters will > fit into it - it depends on the language again). > > > > Windows used to have mulitbyte characters in the past > (Win95,98) but luckily managed to get rid of this with > Windows NT and higher and now both the kernel and userspace > is UCS2. Why should Linux again enter the blind alley of Windows 95? > > You have to check some current sources. > UTF-8 is the defacto modern encoding standard. > There are lots of functions in current software libraries > libc, glib, and QT that encapsulate all the string handling > so the problems you mention don't exist. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 2:40 PM > > > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org > > > Subject: Re: moving to unicode > > > > > > Adam James wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 16:04 +0100, Lubos Vrbka wrote: > > > > > is there any up-to-date document how to move a debian > system to > > > > > utf8 (both console and X)? i found some info on web, > however it > > > > > seems to be quite old (~4 years)... a pointer to a > list of what > > > > > doesn't work with > > > > > utf8 would be really nice, too... > > > > > > > > I found the following documents helpful with regard to UTF-8: > > > > > > > > http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_Make_your_system_use_unicode/utf-8 > > > > > > > > > http://hektor.umcs.lublin.pl/~mikosmul/computing/articles/linux-un > > > > icode.html > > > > > > What is the current progress towards moving Debian fully to > > > UTF-8 on installation as much as possible to easy users > working in > > > Debian? > > > > Prueba el Nuevo Correo Terra; Seguro, Rápido, Fiable. > >
