From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Jan 19 20:07:05 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA28063 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 19 Jan 1998 20:07:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from mother.sneaker.net.au (akm@mother.sneaker.net.au [203.30.3.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA28044 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 1998 20:06:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from akm@mother.sneaker.net.au) Received: (from akm@localhost) by mother.sneaker.net.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA17887; Tue, 20 Jan 1998 15:15:58 +1100 (EST) From: Andrew Kenneth Milton Message-Id: <199801200415.PAA17887@mother.sneaker.net.au> Subject: Re: Wide characters on tcp connections To: louie@TransSys.COM (Louis A. Mamakos) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 15:15:58 +1100 (EST) Cc: daniel_sobral@voga.com.br, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199801200240.VAA20667@whizzo.TransSys.COM> from "Louis A. Mamakos" at Jan 19, 98 09:40:32 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk +-----[ Louis A. Mamakos ]------------------------------ | | | > Though that's technically right, one might feel the need for a standard if | > the files he writes are going to be read by other people's programs. Of | > course TCP, by itself, provides all support you need to send the | > characters, but ignoring the practical problems would be akin to keeping to | > IP (vs TCP or UDP) because that's all you _really_ need... | | What? While you might agree to implement your own transport protocol | directly on IP or using UDP to do multiplexing with your own reliable | transport, none of this makes it any easier to move multibyte characters | between machines. | | If you're looking for a standard way to move multibyte characters, then | choose any one of a number of encodings already used to store multibyte | characters in files. Moving them's not quite the same as storing them.... byte orders, usually come into play a lot more when you've got to shunt the data across a network. I think Unicode defines that it is to be stored in network byte order. Although how standard is your wchar_t between platforms? See another thread for the answer to that one. Your best bet is a higher level (more expensive) wrapping like XDR so that you know that you can transport it between platforms. Or roll your own. -- ,-_|\ SneakerNet | Andrew Milton | GSM: +61(41)6 022 411 / \ P.O. Box 154 | akm@sneaker.net.au | Fax: +61(2) 9746 8233 \_,-._/ N Strathfield +--+----------------------+---+ Ph: +61(2) 9746 8233 v NSW 2137 | Low cost Internet Solutions |