Subject: Re: [SG16-Unicode] [isocpp-core] What is the proper term for the locale dependent run-time character set/encoding used for the character classification and conversion functions?
From: Thiago Macieira (thiago_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-08-12 15:24:01
On Monday, 12 August 2019 11:01:57 PDT Steve Downey wrote:
> I also believe that "execution character set" is used in opposition to the
> "source character set", and it is applied to the translation of string
> literals because that's when it comes up. On the other hand, this may be
> pre-locale wording that has survived, at least partly because no one wants
> to touch locale.
That may be, but I think the original idea was that the runtime and compiler-
presumed encodings would always be one and the same. This is especially true
when we're talking about non-ASCII compatible encodings. If you had some
EBCDIC-encoded source and had
char str = "abc";
compiled to ASCII execution charset, you expect the execution charset to be
ASCII or a superset thereof.
This has broken down in recent decades because Clang and GCC do a pass-through
from the source charset to the narrow execution charset. So you can't get the
same for non-ASCII. The following source if encoded in Latin1:
char str = "é";
will not behave properly under UTF-8 execution charset at runtime. I don't
know if -finput-charset=latin1 makes a difference.
MSVC without /utf-8, on the other hand, has the traditional interpretation.
-- Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org Software Architect - Intel System Software Products
SG16 list run by firstname.lastname@example.org