Re: ctype, chrtbl, rune tables and POSIX2008

[christos%astron.com@localhost (Christos Zoulas)]

In article <20110505214454.GA7387%britannica.bec.de@localhost>,
Joerg Sonnenberger  <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost> wrote:
>On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 10:32:19PM +0900, Takehiko NOZAKI wrote:
>> hi, all.
>> 
>> early stage of implementation of POSIX2008's multi-locale such as *_l
>> function is here.
>> (i wrote it for more 2years ago, need to catch up -current)
>> 
>>
>ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/misc/tnozaki/multi-locale-snapshot-20090102.tar.gz
>> 
>> more information, see following tech-userlevel discussion:
>> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.os.netbsd.devel.userlevel/10401
>
>Your snapshot includes two different interfaces and I would like to get
>a consensus on what we want to support.
>
>One part is the POSIX2008 explicit locale interface. Essentially, all
>functions operating on locale-sensitive data get a version which has
>the locale as explicit argument. E.g. isalpha(ch) -> isalpha_l(ch, l).
>This is highly desirable for multi-thread applications or programs
>dealing with input in different languages at the same time.
>
>The second part is the Linux/Darwin Thread Local Locale interface.
>Basically, this allows setting a locale for the current thread without
>modifying the global (fall back) locale. IMO this is just insane and
>repeating the mistakes of the original locale interface. I am strongly
>in favour of *not* implementing this.

I am also in favor not implementing the Thread Local Locale madness
except if it is required to get libstdc++ working.

christos