Re: Unicode and C++

[Per Hedbor <per idonex se>]

> My point is that, from all possible encodings of unicode, utf-8 is the one
> that the less needs conversions.

Not really. You always have to convert from the 'native'
representation to utf8/whatever.

And I really do doubt that UTF-8 will be the generic charset any time
soon. It's much more convenient to just continue using whatever you
are already using. This is especially true in Japan and other regions
that use iso-2022-*, since those charsets already covers most of the
commonly used unicode.

UTF-8 is also the by far least useful charset from a programming
perspective.  Try changing character 20 in a generic UTF-8 string,
as an example.

-- 
Per Hedbor                                   http://per.hedbor.org/