X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 13:02:22 +0200 (CEST)
Message-Id: <200906191102.n5JB2M0n001584@mail.bln1.bf.nsn-intra.net>
From: Thomas Wolff <towo AT towo DOT net>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com, newlib AT sourceware DOT org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add "@cjknarrow" modifier (was Re: [Fwd: [1.7] wcwidth failing configure tests])
References: <200905201652 DOT n4KGqYGm000509 AT mail DOT bln1 DOT bf DOT nsn-intra DOT net> <200906051625 DOT n55GP6t3028411 AT mail DOT bln1 DOT bf DOT nsn-intra DOT net> <3f0ad08d0906060242t275a78e7tb9913bf78d1c5e83 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <200906121538 DOT n5CFcSld014997 AT mail DOT bln1 DOT bf DOT nsn-intra DOT net> <3f0ad08d0906140604y49c470eeu68c6c307ec1cd073 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <3f0ad08d0906140618w53c82556ye709c70efc1c65e0 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20090615084443 DOT GO5039 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <3f0ad08d0906150735g27576d41t7207970465e5d884 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20090615151420 DOT GT5039 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <200906181209 DOT n5IC9qW6023601 AT mail DOT bln1 DOT bf DOT nsn-intra DOT net>
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

I wrote:
> Despite IWAMURO Motonori's withdrawal, I think symmetry would be the 
> right approach to take. The major aspect is how to reflect the actual 
> behaviour of existing terminal environments. ...

> ...
> The "locale interface" (syntax and semantics of LC_* strings) is defined 
> in a modular way and so the implementations should be - let them fix it.

Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> What do you think, how big will be the acceptance of this approach
> outside of newlib/Cygwin?

I have no idea about the acceptance of the whole concept, especially 
(as I had warned) about changing the width of the CJK locales 
WITHOUT modifier as IWAMURO Motonori insisted.
But I guess a general solution of the width issue will be more 
appreciated than one that handles only the CJK locales.

Thomas

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/