This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Merge cpplib and front end hashtables, part 1
On 17-May-2001, Neil Booth <neil@daikokuya.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> I don't understand how the user is going to communicate the encoding
> of a file to us. My understanding is charset encoding is on a
> per-file basis; i.e. there is only one encoding per file.
Allowing multiple encodings per source file would not be a good idea,
I agree.
> But since some header files are system header files, clearly the whole
> translation unit cannot be in a single charset.
Agreed.
> So we need a way to specify it on a per-file basis, presumably in the
> file itself.
Here I disagree on two counts.
Firstly, I think in most cases it would be more convenient to
specify it on a per-directory basis rather than a per-file basis.
Secondly, there is a serious drawback to specifying the encoding in the
file itself, e.g. via a pragma. The problem arises because files can
be transformed by various tools that understand multibyte encodings
but which don't understand C or GNU C syntax. If the file encoding
is hard-coded inside the file in a pragma, then those tools would change
the encoding but leave the pragma (or other annotation) unchanged and
hence incorrect.
--
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au> | "I have always known that the pursuit
| of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.