Sender:	rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID:	<3DE5337A.5C29C45C@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date:	Wed, 27 Nov 2002 21:04:58 +0000
From:	Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i586)
X-Accept-Language:	de,fr
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	DJGPP workers <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	wctype.h: Why is wctrans_t a const unsigned char?
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

I've been looking at integrating Mark's wide-character work from the archive
Andris found. It implements a few wide-character functions, but there are a
lot that aren't implemented - wide-character I/O, for instance. The ones that
are implemented don't have any knowledge of what the values of the wchar_t
type mean.

Anyway, I was looking at implementing the wctype and wctrans functions. These
return wctype_t and wctrans_t values respectively, which are opaque types.
wctype_t is defined as an unsigned short. wctrans_t is defined as a const
unsigned char. I am wondering why wctrans_t was not defined as an integer type
too. Since these definitions are from the first revision in CVS, this may
require digging deep into memories.

Presumably changing the definition of wctrans_t to an unsigned short too will
break things?

Thanks, bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]

- Raw text -