It would probably be difficult to mandate, since by the time you get around to seeing u{8,16,32} everything has already been converted to internal encoding, which is essentially indistinguishable from Unicode as you can't tell the difference between universal-character-name and an extended source character.

On Tue, Aug 13, 2019, 08:57 Corentin Jabot <> wrote:

On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 at 14:52, Ville Voutilainen <> wrote:
On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 at 15:35, Corentin Jabot via Core
<> wrote:
> Chiming in with my favorite solution:> Forbid u8/u16/u32 literals in non unicode encoded files

But presumably not the ones that look like u8"\U1234" ?

Yes, there is no reason to disallow that as It can't be misinterpreted by neither the compiler or people (and quite a lot of code would needlessly break)

SG16 Unicode mailing list