24 May
2010
24 May
'10
7:18 p.m.
My point is that, if that is implemented correctly, then strictly speaking an implementation where sizeof(wchar_t) == 16 will become non-conforming according to 3.9.1/5. Which would be interesting to see :)
No, it will not as Micorsoft would not agree. This is why C++0x gives us char16_t and char32_t.
As intended by the standard wchar_t should have at least 21 bits for C++ implementations supporting Unicode,
AFAIK actually wchar_t defined by C and it allowed even sizeof(wchar_t)==1
Looking forward to Boost.Locale review!
Me too :-) Artyom