[klibc] Question about islower() in ctype.h (ANSI compat headers
test)
H. Peter Anvin
hpa at zytor.com
Mon Mar 7 19:38:13 PST 2005
Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Maandag 07 März 2005 22:55, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
>>It doesn't seem worth it dropping the iso-8859-1 default for high bytes
>>(it makes the table 128 bytes larger but the code for each invocation
>>gets smaller since it doesn't have to bounds-check); I don't expect to
>>have any kind of wide char/Unicode support any time soon, as much as I
>>like Unicode.
>
>
> Just nitpicking, but is there any reason to use ISO-8859-1 instead of
> ISO-8859-15, which contains the € (Euro) sign? Unfortunately, they are
> not treated identical because e.g. islower() should be true for 'ž' (184),
> but not the respective character '¸' in ISO-8859-1. (Hmm, I wonder if this
> mail comes across correctly in UTF-8).
>
Yes, ISO-8859-1 is more widely used (because most people who were able
to change charsets at all just switched straight to UTF-8) and
toupper/tolower are simpler.
It's there mostly as "a bonus"; that really matters for klibc is that
ASCII works.
-hpa
More information about the klibc
mailing list