Re: Fix u32toutf8 so it encodes values > 0xFFFF correctly.

[John Kearney]

On 02/22/2012 01:59 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 02/22/2012 05:19 AM, Linda Walsh wrote:
>>
>>
>> Eric Blake wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Not only can wchar_t can be either signed or unsigned, you also have to
>>> worry about platforms where it is only 16 bits, such as cygwin; on the
>>> other hand, wint_t is always 32 bits, but you still have the issue that
>>> it can be either signed or unsigned.
>>
>>
>>
>> What platform uses unsigned wide ints?  Is that even posix compat?
> 
> Yes, it is posix compatible to have wint_t be unsigned.  Not only that,
> but both glibc (32-bit wchar_t) and cygwin (16-bit wchar_t) use a 32-bit
> unsigned int for wint_t.  Any code that expects WEOF to be less than 0
> is broken.
> 
But if what you want is a uint32  use a uint32_t ;)