From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12205 invoked by alias); 13 Mar 2008 19:59:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 12195 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Mar 2008 19:59:06 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com (HELO wr-out-0506.google.com) (64.233.184.235) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 19:58:44 +0000 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 58so3363702wri.8 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:58:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.20.7 with SMTP id x7mr6063432rvi.183.1205438318475; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:58:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.123.10 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:58:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 19:59:00 -0000 From: "Andrew Pinski" To: "Paul Koning" Subject: Re: [PATCH] utf-16 and utf-32 support in C and C++ Cc: kris.van.hees@oracle.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <18393.33918.108982.224973@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080313193208.GE19427@oracle.com> <18393.33918.108982.224973@gargle.gargle.HOWL> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2008-03/txt/msg00832.txt.bz2 On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 12:46 PM, Paul Koning wrote: > Is the u"foo" and U"foo" notation a standard? Yes, I know it seems weird but that is what the C draft technical report and the C++ proposal both say. I would agree that U and UL is better but I did not make this up. --- Pinski