I was today years old when I learned that developers of SAPI4 engines had to implement two interfaces, one for ANSI and another for Unicode.
-
I was today years old when I learned that developers of SAPI4 engines had to implement two interfaces, one for ANSI and another for Unicode. This is most likely one of the many reasons new SAPI4 engines stopped being made, as developers had to essentially write many things twice.
-
I was today years old when I learned that developers of SAPI4 engines had to implement two interfaces, one for ANSI and another for Unicode. This is most likely one of the many reasons new SAPI4 engines stopped being made, as developers had to essentially write many things twice.
@datajake1999 As many people here like to say, I'm "unapologetic" about non-Unicode. This must be gone, die, buried, covered with asphalt and forgotten.
-
@datajake1999 As many people here like to say, I'm "unapologetic" about non-Unicode. This must be gone, die, buried, covered with asphalt and forgotten.
@menelion I agree. I can only imagine how broken things would be if we still relied on many different code pages in the modern era. Whenever I encounter character encoding errors, I usually reread a 2003 article on the subject. https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2003/10/08/the-absolute-minimum-every-software-developer-absolutely-positively-must-know-about-unicode-and-character-sets-no-excuses
-
I was today years old when I learned that developers of SAPI4 engines had to implement two interfaces, one for ANSI and another for Unicode. This is most likely one of the many reasons new SAPI4 engines stopped being made, as developers had to essentially write many things twice.
@datajake1999 that makes perfect sense. That was a common ordeal especially with string handling.
-
R relay@relay.publicsquare.global shared this topic
