3 ms·
Good, because nobody should use wchar_t at all. It's the API that was thought up by people who got drunk and asked themselves "how can we make this char situat
by romed 8y ago
Good, because nobody should use wchar_t at all. It's the API that was thought up by people who got drunk and asked themselves "how can we make this char situation even worse?" wchar_t is widely recognized as one of those huge mistakes from the 90s, along with UCS-2. Today you should store strings in as bytes using UTF-8 and if you need to handle them in a fixed-width format you would choose an explicit 32-bit-wide type.
- colejohnson66 8y agoExcept when you’re on Windows and have to use WCHAR to handle Unicode characters because they use UCS-2, not UTF-8
- romed 8y agoOn Windows WCHAR is defined to hold a 16-bit unicode character, and is defined to be unsigned. In standard C wchar_t can be any damn thing, and isn't even guaranteed to be wider than char. It can be signed or unsigned. It is useless.