News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Unicorn: C++ Unicode string library by cmrdporcupine on Friday February 12, 2016 @02:35PM (#11089846)
The unicode portion looks reasonable, but why is it necessary for it to include its own flags, file io, file management, and environment classes?

Why is it so many C++ libraries fall into this habit of trying to build one big framework. I'm perfectly happy with gflags -- a unicode library would be nice for my project, but now I won't consider this library.

Re:Unicorn: C++ Unicode string library by captaincrowbar on Friday February 12, 2016 @02:55PM (#11090034)
Because the whole point is to handle anything that needs Unicode support. A library that only manipulated Unicode strings would be incomplete if you still couldn't use Unicode in command line options, file names, etc.
Re:Unicorn: C++ Unicode string library by cmrdporcupine on Friday February 12, 2016 @10:10PM (#11092289)
I would recommend breaking them off into separate additional libraries. I don't need unicode for flags, so paying for it at compile and link time seems unwise. Or provide adapter classes that can be used over other frameworks. Just a suggestion.
Re:Unicorn: C++ Unicode string library by nly on Friday February 12, 2016 @03:48PM (#11090434)
That's what will happen until there's a defacto/standard library for this stuff. Languages like Python and Go have a wider base in the standard library. C++14 still only gives you platform dependent 'wide' strings, UTF-8 string literals, and UTF-8 conversion... which makes things awkward.