[wx-dev] What's the future of wxT() and _T()?

[Vaclav Slavik]

Vadim Zeitlin wrote:
>  Having written this the rather obvious best choice to me seems to
> be (3). Of course, it still suffers from the problem mentioned by
> David (as do all choices except (0)) in that it can break user code
> passing wxT("foo") to a function taking "wxChar *" but fixing this
> should be trivial. Are there any other hidden problems with this
> that I'm missing?

It's incompatible with 2.8 as well as win32 and it's not even 
consistent between platforms. Compilation of existing code will start 
behaving weirdly (for somebody familiar with _T's common meaning) and 
*differently so* on different platforms, I think that's too 
confusing. It *is* appealing, but it sounds scary to me.

Regards,
Vaclav

-- 
PGP key: 0x465264C9, available from http://pgp.mit.edu/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.wxwidgets.org/pipermail/wx-dev/attachments/20071201/4b47f141/attachment.pgp