Re: [RFC] moneypunct<wchar_t>: mbsrtowcs or just btowc?

[Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at suse dot de>]

Nathan Myers wrote:

> My point was that since the international string is governed by a
> standard, and anything other than (perhaps) space, dot, or an upper
> case letter would be undefined, and there's no point in complexifying
> to accommodate anything else.

I'm always with you when this is the point, you know well that ;)

However, this would be the only case in those functions where btowc is
sufficient, the other (as I have now learned) still needing mbsrtowc.
Therefore the ugly setlocale/__uselocale wrapping cannot be spared and
the code would become less consistent overall. So...

> If somebody supplies a multibyte-encoded
> character, you're not doing them any favors by covering up that they
> made a mistake; the resulting "international" string wouldn't be
> understood by any downstream software.

I see...

Paolo.