On Wed, 15 Nov 2000, Michael (michka) Kaplan wrote:
> In any case, I think that UTF-16 is the answer here.
> Many people try to compare this to DBCS, but it really is not the same
> thing.... understanding lead bytes and trail bytes in DBCS is *astoundingly*
> more complicated than handling surrogate pairs.
Well, it depends on what multibyte encoding you're talking about. In case
of 'pure' EUC encodings (EUC-JP, EUC-KR, EUC-CN, EUC-TW) as opposed to
SJIS(Windows94?), Windows-949(UHC), Windows-950, WIndows-125x(JOHAB),
ISO-2022-JP(-2), ISO-2022-KR, ISO-2022-CN , it's not that hard (about
the same as UTF-16, I believe, especially in case of EUC-CN and EUC-KR)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:15 EDT