* Lars Marius Garshol
| It can, but how hard it is depends on what it is you want to do with
| those Unicode strings.
* Peter Constable
| There's no question that Win9x/Me makes you do more work, and I did
| say that Win2K/XP are much better platforms on which to work with
| Unicode. I was simply responding to Michael's blanket statement that
| Unicode on Win9x/Me is basically not an option, which is not
| strictly correct, [...]
It isn't, but then he wasn't really saying that. He just said that the
OS didn't support it, which is true. You can of course do whatever you
want in user space, which is basically your point. Our point is that
that is possible, but painful.
You called Michael's view "grim", and, well, that's precisely the
feeling I get when I think of having to do full Unicode support in an
application on Win9X/ME.
| BTW, it's my understanding that, by using MSLU (which Michael helped
| develop!), a develop can avoid much of the hard work you refer to.
Yes, I think it can. I don't think it covers everything, and I'm not
sure how easy it is to use if you want to have the same binary work on
both Win9X and WinNT. It wasn't available when I needed this, so I
haven't looked at it.
 Dropping the marketing labels to make life easier.
-- Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian <URL: http://www.ontopia.net > ISO SC34/WG3, OASIS GeoLang TC <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 11 2002 - 16:55:40 EDT