Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2004/12/29/09:43:48
Hello.
I've put the setlocale code provided by Brian Inglis and Alexander
Aganichev in my tree and recompiled it. A minor correction with
regards to signed/unsigned comparion made it compile.
Then I recompiled the setlocal.c file with "gcc -Wall -g -DTEST" to
get a test program. Just running it seems to be ok and it reports
"Locale: sv_SE.850", a map of characters (which I only lightly
inspected), a collate table (not verified) and a number and date/time
format. Then I tried with "setlocal C" and it seems ok too (again no
deep analysis). Then I tried "setlocal en", "setlocal rubbish",
"setlocal sv" and "setlocal sv_SE" and the program displays reasonable
things, except maybe for the collate table. In these cases the collate
table is all zeroes.
Perhaps it is the right thing to do. But I wanted to ask. And I
thought (may very well be completely wrong) that locales may be
abbrevated, like instead of using "sv_SE.850" I may use "sv_SE" or
"sv" which would use an approximate collate table, which then may be
further be qualified.
Again I don't know much about this sort of stuff.
Should there be some changes to setlocal.txh?
Is there a more complete test program for tests/...?
Right,
MartinS
- Raw text -