[Matroska-devel] mmg.exe 2 Bugs Related to Charset

Jory Stone jcsston at jory.info
Thu Dec 30 01:10:42 CET 2004


Actually the last version of CoreFLAC I did work on was 0.3, I think Toff 
did the 0.4 release. Which BTW The filter was his work originally.

Jory

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Liisachan" <Liisachan at faireal.net>
To: "Discussion about the current and future development of Matroska" 
<matroska-devel at lists.matroska.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 8:16 AM
Subject: Re: [Matroska-devel] mmg.exe 2 Bugs Related to Charset


> "Jory Stone" <jcsston at jory.info> wrote:
>
> Hi, thanks for your great work.
> With CoreFLAC 0.3 I was always having trouble that I was not
> able to rewind the file when it is finished, but 0.4 has fixed
> my problem. I like it very much.
>
>> The official CoreFLAC doesn't support Unicode filenames simply due to the
>> fact the libflac doesn't. I did create a version of CoreFLAC that did
>> support Unicode, by using the File Source filter, but libflac randomly 
>> would
>> crash for no apparent reason.
>
> Well, let me make one thing clear, just in case.
> I'm reporting 2 different problems:
> one is Unicode-related and the other is not:
>
> (1) Not being able to open Unicode filename is, not a VERY big
> problem. Many apps can't either.
>
> (2) CoreFLAC does not support 'usual' non-unicode filenames,
> either (i.e. Windows Codepage; MS-DOS compatible, old thing)
>
> Most apps can handle SHIFT_JIS filenames if the system default
> code page is SHIFT_JIS. But CoreFLAC can't.
>
> So if libflac is problematic, it has 2 different problems:
> (1) It doesnt support Unicode.
> (2) It doesnt support Multibyte charcter sets.
>
> To solve (1) basically everything should be in WCHAR,
> and as you know much better than I, even an ascii alphabet 'a'
> will be 2-byte in WCHAR.
>
> (2) can be solved without supporting Unicode,
> by just seeing a MB char = 2 Ascii chars.
> In that case ascii 'a' is 'a'
> There are some tricks like sometimes the 2nd half of the MB char
> is '\\', but solving (2) should be easier than solving (1).
> Because there's no need for a radical change.
>
> Liisachan
>
> _______________________________________________
> Matroska-devel mailing list
> Matroska-devel at lists.matroska.org
> http://lists.matroska.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/matroska-devel
> 




More information about the Matroska-devel mailing list