Re: [TSVN] CString vs std::string

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 11:00:23 +0000, Will Dean <svn@indcomp.co.uk> wrote:
> >We could gain much more if we would drop Win98 support ;) That way we
> >could reduce the UTF8 functions and many many #ifndef UNICODE
> >statements.
>
> Yes, or we could go to the new(-ish) unicode translation layer for Win98,
> but I think that's probably a bit much.

If we keep using MFC, we can't use the translation layer MSLU. There's
a whole bunch of postings on the usenet which claim that MFC doesn't
work correctly with MSLU. I once tried it myself (with MFC7, not
MFC7.1, but I guess that won't make a difference) and it didn't work.

> >If there's no good reason to using ATL/MFC in the shell extension, I'd
> >like to keep it out of there.
>
> We'll have to define "good"! I think getting rid of the #ifdef _MFC_VER
> stuff would be good, but I'm not sure that it's enough.

We could create just another class and put it in the shell folder.
Then the #ifdef _MFC_VER isn't needed anymore.

Stefan

-- 
       ___
  oo  // \\      "De Chelonian Mobile"
 (_,\/ \_/ \     TortoiseSVN
   \ \_/_\_/>    The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
   /_/   \_\     http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tortoisesvn.tigris.org