On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 04:11, Itagaki Takahiro
<itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>
> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>
>> I can certainly review the win32 encoding patch, but I was rather
>> hoping for some comments from others on if we're interested in a win32
>> only solution, or if we want something more generic. Should we just go
>> with the win32-only one for now?
>
> Yes, because Windows is only platform that supports UTF-16 encoding natively.
> I believe my patch is the best solution for Windows even if we have another
> approach for other platforms.
Actually, I think a better argument is that since Windows will *never*
accept UTF8 logging, and that's what most databases will be in, much
of this patch will be required anyway. So I should probably review and
get this part in while we think about other solutions *as well* for
other platforms.
-- Magnus HaganderMe: http://www.hagander.net/Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/