892

I am not able to understand the differences between std::string and std::wstring. I know wstring supports wide characters such as Unicode characters. I have got the following questions:

  1. When should I use std::wstring over std::string?
  2. Can std::string hold the entire ASCII character set, including the special characters?
  3. Is std::wstring supported by all popular C++ compilers?
  4. What is exactly a "wide character"?
Rapptz
  • 20,807
  • 5
  • 72
  • 86
  • 13
    The ASCII charachter set doesn't have a lot of "special" characters, the most exotic is probably ` (backquote). std::string can hold about 0.025% of all Unicode characters (usually, 8 bit char) – MSalters Jan 02 '09 at 14:24
  • 1
    If by "special" you mean the characters from 128 to 255, that depend on the norm used, then yes they are supported. – Zonko Jun 09 '11 at 23:42
  • 4
    Good information about wide characters and which type to use can be found here: http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/102205/should-utf-16-be-considered-harmful – Yariv Mar 14 '12 at 11:19
  • 15
    Well, and since we are in 2012, http://www.utf8everywhere.org was written. It pretty much answers all questions about rights and wrongs with C++/Windows. – Pavel Radzivilovsky Jun 21 '12 at 04:19
  • 53
    @MSalters: std::string can hold 100% of all Unicode characters, even if CHAR_BIT is 8. It depends on the encoding of std::string, which may be UTF-8 on the system level (like almost everywhere except for windows) or on your application level. Native narrow encoding doesn't support Unicode? No problem, just don't use it, use UTF-8 instead. – Yakov Galka Jun 22 '12 at 10:19
  • 1
    Concerning WinAPI based application it's very inconvenient to use std::string because you'll loose on conversions (UNICODE <-> ANSI) which happen very often. Of course, you can use ANSI aliases of WinAPI functions but they are only macroses which implicitly convert your ANSI encoded arguments to UNICODE ones and call "real" API code that is ALL UNICODE based (refer to J.Richter "Programming Windows" 5th ed.) – nickolay May 17 '13 at 16:11
  • 8
    Great reading on this topic: http://www.utf8everywhere.org/ – Timothy Shields Aug 05 '13 at 18:29

13 Answers13

1151

string? wstring?

std::string is a basic_string templated on a char, and std::wstring on a wchar_t.

char vs. wchar_t

char is supposed to hold a character, usually an 8-bit character. wchar_t is supposed to hold a wide character, and then, things get tricky: On Linux, a wchar_t is 4 bytes, while on Windows, it's 2 bytes.

What about Unicode, then?

The problem is that neither char nor wchar_t is directly tied to Unicode.

On Linux?

Let's take a Linux OS: My Ubuntu system is already Unicode aware. When I work with a char string, it is natively encoded in UTF-8 (i.e. a Unicode string of chars). The following code:

#include <cstring>
#include <iostream>

int main()
{
    const char text[] = "olé";


    std::cout << "sizeof(char)    : " << sizeof(char) << "\n";
    std::cout << "text            : " << text << "\n";
    std::cout << "sizeof(text)    : " << sizeof(text) << "\n";
    std::cout << "strlen(text)    : " << strlen(text) << "\n";

    std::cout << "text(ordinals)  :";

    for(size_t i = 0, iMax = strlen(text); i < iMax; ++i)
    {
        unsigned char c = static_cast<unsigned_char>(text[i]);
        std::cout << " " << static_cast<unsigned int>(c);
    }

    std::cout << "\n\n";

    // - - -

    const wchar_t wtext[] = L"olé" ;

    std::cout << "sizeof(wchar_t) : " << sizeof(wchar_t) << "\n";
    //std::cout << "wtext           : " << wtext << "\n"; <- error
    std::cout << "wtext           : UNABLE TO CONVERT NATIVELY." << "\n";
    std::wcout << L"wtext           : " << wtext << "\n";

    std::cout << "sizeof(wtext)   : " << sizeof(wtext) << "\n";
    std::cout << "wcslen(wtext)   : " << wcslen(wtext) << "\n";

    std::cout << "wtext(ordinals) :";

    for(size_t i = 0, iMax = wcslen(wtext); i < iMax; ++i)
    {
        unsigned short wc = static_cast<unsigned short>(wtext[i]);
        std::cout << " " << static_cast<unsigned int>(wc);
    }

    std::cout << "\n\n";
}

outputs the following text:

sizeof(char)    : 1
text            : olé
sizeof(text)    : 5
strlen(text)    : 4
text(ordinals)  : 111 108 195 169

sizeof(wchar_t) : 4
wtext           : UNABLE TO CONVERT NATIVELY.
wtext           : ol�
sizeof(wtext)   : 16
wcslen(wtext)   : 3
wtext(ordinals) : 111 108 233

You'll see the "olé" text in char is really constructed by four chars: 110, 108, 195 and 169 (not counting the trailing zero). (I'll let you study the wchar_t code as an exercise)

So, when working with a char on Linux, you should usually end up using Unicode without even knowing it. And as std::string works with char, so std::string is already unicode-ready.

Note that std::string, like the C string API, will consider the "olé" string to have 4 characters, not three. So you should be cautious when truncating/playing with Unicode chars because some combination of chars is forbidden in UTF-8.

On Windows?

On Windows, this is a bit different. Win32 had to support a lot of applications working with char and on different charsets/codepages produced in all the world, before the advent of Unicode.

So their solution was an interesting one: If an application works with char, then the char strings are encoded/printed/shown on GUI labels using the local charset/codepage on the machine, which could not be UTF-8 for a long time. For example, "olé" would be "olé" in a French-localized Windows, but would be something different on an cyrillic-localized Windows ("olй" if you use Windows-1251). Thus, "historical apps" will usually still work the same old way.

For Unicode based applications, Windows uses wchar_t, which is 2-bytes wide and is encoded in UTF-16, which is Unicode encoded on 2-bytes characters (or at the very least, UCS-2, which just lacks surrogate-pairs and thus characters outside the BMP (>= 64K)).

Applications using char are said "multibyte" (because each glyph is composed of one or more chars), while applications using wchar_t are said "widechar" (because each glyph is composed of one or two wchar_t. See MultiByteToWideChar and WideCharToMultiByte Win32 conversion API for more info.

Thus, if you work on Windows, you badly want to use wchar_t (unless you use a framework hiding that, like GTK or QT...). The fact is that behind the scenes, Windows works with wchar_t strings, so even historical applications will have their char strings converted in wchar_t when using API like SetWindowText() (low-level API function to set the label on a Win32 GUI).

Memory issues?

UTF-32 is 4 bytes per characters, so there is not much to add, if only that a UTF-8 text and UTF-16 text will always use less or the same amount of memory than an UTF-32 text (and usually less).

If there is a memory issue, then you should know than for most western languages, UTF-8 text will use less memory than the same UTF-16 one.

Still, for other languages (Chinese, Japanese, etc.), the memory used will be either the same, or slightly larger for UTF-8 than for UTF-16.

All in all, UTF-16 will mostly use 2 and occasionally 4 bytes per character (unless you're dealing with some kind of esoteric language glyphs (Klingon? Elvish?), while UTF-8 will spend from 1 to 4 bytes.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTF-8#Compared_to_UTF-16 for more info.

Conclusion

  1. When I should use std::wstring over std::string?

    On Linux? Almost never (§). On Windows? Almost always (§). On cross-platform code? Depends on your toolkit...

    (§) : unless you use a toolkit/framework saying otherwise

  2. Can std::string hold all the ASCII character sets including special characters?

    Notice: A std::string is suitable for holding a 'binary' buffer, where a std::wstring is not!

    On Linux? Yes. On Windows? Only special characters are available for the current locale of the Windows user.

    Edit (After a comment from Johann Gerell): a std::string will be enough to handle all char-based strings (each char being a number from 0 to 255). But:

    1. ASCII is supposed to go from 0 to 127. Higher chars are NOT ASCII.
    2. a char from 0 to 127 will be held correctly
    3. a char from 128 to 255 will have a signification depending on your encoding (Unicode, non-Unicode, etc.), but it will be able to hold all Unicode glyphs as long as they are encoded in UTF-8.
  3. Is std::wstring supported by almost all popular C++ compilers?

    Mostly, with the exception of GCC-based compilers that are ported to Windows. It works on my g++ 4.3.2 (under Linux), and I used Unicode API on Win32 since Visual C++ 6.

  4. What is exactly a wide character?

    In C/C++, it's a character typewritten wchar_t which is larger than the simple char character type. It is supposed to be used to put inside characters whose indices (like Unicode glyphs) are larger than 255 (or 127, depending...).

paercebal
  • 81,378
  • 38
  • 130
  • 159
  • 3
    Hum. I didn't know that windows did not follow the POSIX spec in this regard. POSIX says that a wchar_t must be able to represent "distinct wide-character codes for all members of the largest character set specified among the locales supported by the compilation environment". – gnud Jan 02 '09 at 20:41
  • 4
    @gnud: Perhaps wchar_t was supposed to be enough to handle all UCS-2 chars (most UTF-16 chars) before the advent of UTF-16... Or perhaps Microsoft did have other priorities than POSIX, like giving easy access to Unicode without modifying the codepaged use of char on Win32. – paercebal Jan 02 '09 at 20:49
  • 1
    @gnud: Note the definition of wchar_t, quoted on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wchar_t ... Apparently, whcar_t on Windows follows what was asked by Unicode... ^_^ ... – paercebal Jan 02 '09 at 20:58
  • Your response does explain very well the differences between the two alternatives. Remark: UTF-8 can take 1-6 bytes and not 1-4 like you wrote. Also I would like to see people opinion between the two alternatives. – sorin Jan 10 '10 at 15:20
  • 7
    @Sorin Sbarnea: UTF-8 could take 1-6 bytes, but apparently the standard limits it to 1-4. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTF8#Description for more information. – paercebal Jan 13 '10 at 13:10
  • Compiling and executing your code on Mac OS X gives the same output as on your linux machine. – WolfgangP Jul 05 '10 at 14:10
  • 2
    @Wolfgang Plaschg : Thanks for the info. This is not unexpected, as MacOS X is a Unix, so this seems natural they went the way "char is a UTF-8" for Unicode support... AFAIK, the only reasons Windows did not follow the same road was to continue support for pre-Unicode charset-based old apps. – paercebal Jul 05 '10 at 18:47
  • 2
    @paercebal UTF-8 cannot take 6 bytes. Exactly because the the standard limits it to 4 bytes. The standard defines things, so 6 bytes means it is not UTF-8 anymore, by definition. – Mihai Nita May 28 '11 at 10:28
  • @Mihai Nita : `UTF-8 cannot take 6 bytes. Exactly because the the standard limits it to 4 bytes.` . I agree. I agree so much with you I did already write that in a previous comment : `@Sorin Sbarnea: UTF-8 could take 1-6 bytes, but apparently the standard limits it to 1-4.` ... ^_^ ... I guess the point of my remark was to remind that the limitation to 4 was artificial, that the encoding used by UTF-8 could support up to 6 bytes for a 1-byte char, even if the standard decided to limit it to 4. – paercebal May 29 '11 at 06:02
  • I want to do #include std::wstring ws; ws += wchar(2591); /*25% shade character */ std::wcout< – Jim Michaels Jan 21 '12 at 05:54
  • 1
    @Jim Michaels : You're trying to output the character x0A1F (Gurmukhi). a wchar_t is able to contain that character, so your string is correct. If the `wcout` output is not correct, it may be because to font use for the output console is not ready for the Gurmukhi symbols ( http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U0A00.pdf ) – paercebal Jan 21 '12 at 18:11
  • 9
    While this examples produces different results on Linux and Windows the C++ program contains implementation-defined behavior as to whether `olè` is encoded as UTF-8 or not. Further more, the reason you cannot *natively* stream `wchar_t *` to `std::cout` is because the types are incompatible resulting in an ill-formed program and it has nothing to do with the use of encodings. It's worth pointing out that whether you use `std::string` or `std::wstring` depends on your own encoding preference rather than the platform, especially if you want your code to be portable. – John Leidegren Aug 09 '12 at 09:37
  • @JohnLeidegren : `While this examples produces different results on Linux and Windows the C++ program contains implementation-defined behavior as to whether olè is encoded as UTF-8 or not.` : Yes. Indeed, the point was to show that. `Further more, the reason you cannot natively stream wchar_t * to std::cout is because the types are incompatible resulting in an ill-formed program and it has nothing to do with the use of encodings.` : Indeed. I was giving the multiple combinations, and if not possible, explaining why in the code, for completness' sake, not making the point you suggest... – paercebal Aug 09 '12 at 12:51
  • 1
    @John Leidegren : `It's worth pointing out that whether you use std::string or std::wstring depends on your own encoding preference rather than the platform` : Indeed. But then, if the constraints are "use unicode, while not using 4 bytes for each character", the platform pretty much limits your options, that is, `std::wstring` on Windows, and `std::string` on Linux... (*You could try to use an UTF-8 `std::string` on Windows, but then, your UTF-8 strings would not be understood by the WinAPI using `char *` characters.*) – paercebal Aug 09 '12 at 13:03
  • 4
    @paercebal Whatever the platform supports is entirely arbitrary and besides the point. If you store all strings internally as UTF-8 on Windows you'll have to convert them to either ANSI or UTF-16 and call the corresponding Win32 function but if you know your UTF-8 strings are just plain ASCII strings you don't have to do anything. The platform doesn't dictate how you use strings as much as the circumstances. – John Leidegren Aug 09 '12 at 16:35
  • 1
    @John Leidegren : Of course the platform dictates how you use the strings. On Windows, you have no choice: `char` strings have a specific codepage/encoding, so **how** you use the `std::string`, either by writing convertors, or by using codepage specific functions, must be decided. As for `std::wstring`, unless you use a conversion interface, you know the encoding must be the Windows version of UTF-16 (last time I checked, it was UCS-2), thus **how** you interpret the characters in that context. As I see this, this is "**how**", not "**circumstances**". But let's not lose time on vocabulary... – paercebal Aug 09 '12 at 17:13
  • 15
    Windows actually uses UTF-16 and have been for quite some time, older versions of Windows did use UCS-2 but this is not the case any longer. My only issue here is the conclusion that `std::wstring` should be used on Windows because it's a better fit for the Unicode Windows API which I think is fallacious. If your only concern was calling into the Unicode Windows API and not marshalling strings then sure but I don't buy this as the general case. – John Leidegren Aug 09 '12 at 18:15
  • 18
    @ John Leidegren : `If your only concern was calling into the Unicode Windows API and not marshalling strings then sure` : Then, we agree. I'm coding in C++, not JavaScript. Avoiding useless marshalling or any other potentially costly processing at runtime when it can be done at compile time is at the heart of that language. Coding against WinAPI and using `std::string` is just an unjustified wasting runtime resources. You find it fallacious, and it's Ok, as it is your viewpoint. My own is that I won't write code with pessimization on Windows just because it looks better from the Linux side. – paercebal Aug 09 '12 at 19:48
  • @gnud: see [this great answer](http://stackoverflow.com/a/11107667/277176) for why the POSIX requirement (in fact it is C++ requirement) does not violate the use of variable length encoding. – Yakov Galka Nov 10 '12 at 17:34
  • As a slight correction, UTF-16 encoding can take either 2 OR 4 bytes per character. (see http://www.unicode.org/faq/utf_bom.html#gen6) – lfalin Aug 20 '14 at 17:58
  • @lfalin : Indeed. The first time I speak about wide characters on Windows, I describe how Windows was not quite clear (at least, to me) about how it handled "unicode" (what is UCS-2 or UTF-16?). The second time, I write about the size of a character: "All in all, UTF-16 will *mostly* use 2 bytes per characters (unless you're dealing with some kind of esoteric language glyphs (Klingon? Elvish?), while UTF-8 will spend from 1 to 4 bytes.", which is more or less what you're saying (the keyword being "mostly"). I guess what should be clarified in my answer is Windows' stance on the subject. – paercebal Aug 20 '14 at 21:55
  • interesting to note that if you do a `cout` before the `wcout` the unicode characters don't print with `wcout`. If, however, you start with `wcout`, the `cout`'s don't even print at all, and all unicode prints print correctly. Almost as if some internal state is kept in the libs? – Climax May 16 '15 at 11:20
  • 2
    @paercebal: Just a note: One of those exotic languages is chinese btw. Thus the PRC decided to make support for some codepoints outside the BMP mandatory quite some time ago. – Deduplicator Oct 10 '15 at 11:34
  • 3
    "when working with a char on Linux, you should usually end up using Unicode without even knowing it. And as std::string works with char, so std::string is already unicode-ready." -- this should go with a BIG warning "never truncate, limit, take char-at" your strings. This can be understood from the whole answer, but should be made super-clear. – Piotr Findeisen Dec 09 '16 at 19:50
  • 3
    @paercebal I realize this comment thread is as old as time itself, but insisting on matching WinAPI string format for performance reasons is just silly. The cost of the API calls themselves will dwarf conversion costs; the performance cost of the extra storage required for UTF-16 strings will probably negate any potential conversion-related gains; and if you communicate with other APIs, you'll likely need to do conversions anyway. See http://utf8everywhere.org/#faq.cvt.perf for an example. – Stuntddude Oct 25 '17 at 00:42
  • 4
    For a windows program, which gets its input as UTF-8 encoded strings, there is no point in converting everyhing to `wchar_t`. Only convert on direct interaction with WinAPI. As long as the compiler works with UTF-8 encoding, I see no point in preferring `wchar_t` over `char`. As usual, it depends on the requirements. – Roi Danton Jan 14 '19 at 10:37
  • Thanks for reminding us the underlying truth: strings are **horrible** in C/C++ – Mr. Boy Feb 13 '20 at 11:33
  • 1
    "A `std::string` is suitable for holding a 'binary' buffer, where a `std::wstring` is not!" - can you provide a source for this claim? – Paul Oct 02 '20 at 23:13
  • I don't understand something, if I have a cross platform program, does that mean I need to make an abstraction layer over std::string for text that is localized, that would e.g., turn into std::string on Linux and std::wstring on Windows? – jrh Dec 13 '20 at 15:57
  • @paercebal Really nice answer, but much is changing with c++20 char8_t and in Windows Windows... "New Windows applications should use Unicode to avoid the inconsistencies of varied code pages and for ease of localization." https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/intl/code-pages "Until recently, Windows has emphasized "Unicode" -W variants over -A APIs. However, recent releases have used the ANSI code page and -A APIs as a means to introduce UTF-8 support to apps. [...]" https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/apps/design/globalizing/use-utf8-code-page – buzz3791 May 26 '22 at 14:25
  • Note that displaying `sizeof(char)` is redundant, it's always 1 by definition. – Mark Ransom Aug 06 '22 at 17:34
108

I recommend avoiding std::wstring on Windows or elsewhere, except when required by the interface, or anywhere near Windows API calls and respective encoding conversions as a syntactic sugar.

My view is summarized in http://utf8everywhere.org of which I am a co-author.

Unless your application is API-call-centric, e.g. mainly UI application, the suggestion is to store Unicode strings in std::string and encoded in UTF-8, performing conversion near API calls. The benefits outlined in the article outweigh the apparent annoyance of conversion, especially in complex applications. This is doubly so for multi-platform and library development.

And now, answering your questions:

  1. A few weak reasons. It exists for historical reasons, where widechars were believed to be the proper way of supporting Unicode. It is now used to interface APIs that prefer UTF-16 strings. I use them only in the direct vicinity of such API calls.
  2. This has nothing to do with std::string. It can hold whatever encoding you put in it. The only question is how You treat its content. My recommendation is UTF-8, so it will be able to hold all Unicode characters correctly. It's a common practice on Linux, but I think Windows programs should do it also.
  3. No.
  4. Wide character is a confusing name. In the early days of Unicode, there was a belief that a character can be encoded in two bytes, hence the name. Today, it stands for "any part of the character that is two bytes long". UTF-16 is seen as a sequence of such byte pairs (aka Wide characters). A character in UTF-16 takes either one or two pairs.
user1741137
  • 4,949
  • 2
  • 19
  • 28
Pavel Radzivilovsky
  • 18,794
  • 5
  • 57
  • 67
  • Here is my explanation of string encodings in the context of JavaScript: https://github.com/duzun/string-encode.js/blob/master/README.md#the-theory-of-string- – DUzun Sep 23 '20 at 21:42
  • I think your idea of using wstring only on API calls is interesting, but I am a bit confused about getting data *in* to the program; right now I am using a stringstream to pipe the data from a fstream into, is it safe to assume that the C++ standard library is capable of detecting that a text file is UTF-8 and will construct a string in the right encoding automatically? Or will it interpret the text file as 8 bit chars and return garbled text? Do the standards say anything about this? – jrh Dec 13 '20 at 16:03
  • 1
    @jrh": The C++ standard library does not check file types or handle encodings. If you stream a UTF8 file into a `std::string`, you'll end up with a `std::string` that contains UTF8, with the pros and cons that entails. if you stream a UTF8 file into a `std::wstring`, then you end up with garbage. (Similarly, streaming a UTF16 file into a `std::string` produces garbage, but `std::wstring` would be valid, at least on Windows) – Mooing Duck Apr 29 '22 at 15:28
  • 1
    @MooingDuck yes, I later found that to be the case. On a related note one of the very unfortunate parts of the standard library is that exception messages are always char* not wchar*, which is unfortunate in Windows if your exception message has to e.g., include a unicode file name / key / etc., or "Failed to parse '견고한 논리' as integer". That does add to the reasoning of "use UTF-8 as much as possible" because if you used wchars for most of the program instead you'd have to convert to UTF-8 to store an exception message, and that conversion itself can sadly throw an exception. – jrh Apr 29 '22 at 16:08
  • An important reason not to do this conversion is that `WCHAR` strings can contain unpaired surrogates. Filenames with unpaired surrogates exist in the wild (Cygwin uses them, for instance), but are rare enough that they may be missed in testing. A malicious party could create one to crash your program, or even do worse if, e.g., a failed conversion doesn't write a terminating NUL. You can work around this by using a UTF-8 compatible encoding that can roundtrip surrogates, but many Unicode libraries don't provide that, and of course it isn't UTF-8 so it violates your UTF-8 everywhere advice. – benrg May 16 '22 at 00:23
41

So, every reader here now should have a clear understanding about the facts, the situation. If not, then you must read paercebal's outstandingly comprehensive answer [btw: thanks!].

My pragmatical conclusion is shockingly simple: all that C++ (and STL) "character encoding" stuff is substantially broken and useless. Blame it on Microsoft or not, that will not help anyway.

My solution, after in-depth investigation, much frustration and the consequential experiences is the following:

  1. accept, that you have to be responsible on your own for the encoding and conversion stuff (and you will see that much of it is rather trivial)

  2. use std::string for any UTF-8 encoded strings (just a typedef std::string UTF8String)

  3. accept that such an UTF8String object is just a dumb, but cheap container. Do never ever access and/or manipulate characters in it directly (no search, replace, and so on). You could, but you really just really, really do not want to waste your time writing text manipulation algorithms for multi-byte strings! Even if other people already did such stupid things, don't do that! Let it be! (Well, there are scenarios where it makes sense... just use the ICU library for those).

  4. use std::wstring for UCS-2 encoded strings (typedef std::wstring UCS2String) - this is a compromise, and a concession to the mess that the WIN32 API introduced). UCS-2 is sufficient for most of us (more on that later...).

  5. use UCS2String instances whenever a character-by-character access is required (read, manipulate, and so on). Any character-based processing should be done in a NON-multibyte-representation. It is simple, fast, easy.

  6. add two utility functions to convert back & forth between UTF-8 and UCS-2:

    UCS2String ConvertToUCS2( const UTF8String &str );
    UTF8String ConvertToUTF8( const UCS2String &str );
    

The conversions are straightforward, google should help here ...

That's it. Use UTF8String wherever memory is precious and for all UTF-8 I/O. Use UCS2String wherever the string must be parsed and/or manipulated. You can convert between those two representations any time.

Alternatives & Improvements

  • conversions from & to single-byte character encodings (e.g. ISO-8859-1) can be realized with help of plain translation tables, e.g. const wchar_t tt_iso88951[256] = {0,1,2,...}; and appropriate code for conversion to & from UCS2.

  • if UCS-2 is not sufficient, than switch to UCS-4 (typedef std::basic_string<uint32_t> UCS2String)

ICU or other unicode libraries?

For advanced stuff.

Frunsi
  • 7,099
  • 5
  • 36
  • 42
  • 1
    Dang, it's not good to know that native Unicode support isn't there. – Mihai Danila Dec 15 '13 at 16:59
  • @Frunsi, I'm curious to know if you've tried Glib::ustring and if so, what are your thoughts? – Caroline Beltran Sep 19 '14 at 19:44
  • @CarolineBeltran: I know Glib, but I never used it, and I probably will never even use it, because it is rather limited to a rather unspecific target platform (unixoid systems...). Its windows port is based on external win2unix-layer, and there IMHO is no OSX-compatibility-layer at all. All this stuff is directing clearly into a wrong direction, at least for my code (on this arch level...) ;-) So, Glib is not an option – Frunsi Sep 20 '14 at 05:01
  • I think points 2 and 3 are yelling to NOT use std::string for utf8. IF you still want to save on the memory, then subclass std::string so that you get atleast asserts and warnings when you use substr, concat and length, and basically any content perturbing string operation functionality. Personally I advise to use wstrings for unicode strings, regardless if you settle on utf8, 16 or 32, or ucs-2. You'll have a much easier time doing IO with those. Even UI components nowadays deal properly with unicode strings, so the downconversion should only be necessary when dealing with older components. – StarShine Oct 07 '14 at 14:25
  • @StarShine & @CarolineBeltran: Maybe... But subclassing `std::string` results in just another view on the problem, which is just another wrong kind of "std::string", as std::string itself already is. A __comprehensive solution__ would contain of an `std::string` that differs between memory layout issues and character sequence issues. So, for a start, for example, an std::string should have a method `size()` and a method `nchars()`. – Frunsi Oct 08 '14 at 01:59
  • BTW: Even C++11x, C++14x nor any future standards, nor anyone else did yet care about that issue. So, I18N in C++ is still a thing where solutions are still expected... – Frunsi Oct 08 '14 at 02:01
  • Oh and @StarShine: read the full answer please. It is not as easy as you may think. – Frunsi Oct 08 '14 at 02:13
  • @Frunsi: Ah, maybe I missed it. How does your "UTF8String" typedef bring about a comprehensive solution that differs between memory layout issues and character sequence issues? It's a refactoring tool at best, but not a solution. Firstly, good luck forcing nchars() into the standard. Secondly, how sure can you really be that 3rd party libs are not chopping up your utf8 sequences? Finally, utf8 is harder to parse and debug. If you use wstring and ucs2 or proper utf16 from the start, your debugger will display the correct Chinese string, without you having to puzzle it together from byte codes. – StarShine Oct 08 '14 at 08:39
  • @StarShine: An `UTF8String` typedef is not a comprehensive solution. It is just a pragmatic solution that works (in most cases, most of the time). IMHO it is time for the C++ standards people to provide a better solution. The basics (Unicode and its different encoding schemes, as UTF8 and UCS-2, are here and here to stay), so it is the right time now ;-) – Frunsi Oct 10 '14 at 13:21
  • @StarShine: Please also note, that my solution will have the same issues as UCS-2, e.g. when working with chinese strings! So, this is really just a pragmatical thing, no comprehensive solution. – Frunsi Oct 10 '14 at 13:25
  • 13
    Search, replace, and so on works just fine on UTF-8 strings (a part of the byte sequence representing a character can never be misinterpreted as another character). In fact, UTF-16 and UTF-32 don't make this any easier at all: all three encodings are multibyte encodings in practice, because a user-perceived character (grapheme cluster) can be any number of unicode codepoints long! The pragmatic solution is to use UTF-8 for everything, and convert to UTF-16 only when dealing with the Windows API. – Daniel Oct 17 '14 at 10:49
  • @Daniel: Why do you think a pragmatical solution would use UTF-8 for everything? Single-Byte Search & Replace code may not do much harm on UTF-8 byte sequences, but it will not solve actual problems either :P Using UTF-8 for "everything" is the wrong path for anyone... Using UTF-8 for storage & transfer is fine, but using it for processing strings will result in exponential growth of required code to handle all cases & combinations. Maybe. But maybe all character-based operations can be rewritten to work on graphemes? Probably not, right? So... – Frunsi Oct 22 '14 at 22:44
  • @Daniel: "Search, replace and so on" will NOT just work fine on UTF-8 strings, unfortunately it is much more complicated, see e.g. http://www.utf8everywhere.org/#myth.strlen - and of course UTF-16 and UTF-32 don't make this easier. So? – Frunsi Oct 23 '14 at 00:23
  • 6
    @Frunsi: Search and replace works just as fine with UTF-8 as with UTF-32. It's precisely because proper Unicode-aware text processing needs to deal with multi-codepoint 'characters' anyways, that using a variable length encoding like UTF-8 doesn't make string processing any more complicated. So just use UTF-8 everywhere. Normal C string functions will work fine on UTF-8 (and correspond to ordinal comparisons on the Unicode string), and if you need anything more language-aware, you'll have to call into a Unicode library anyways, UTF-16/32 can't save you from that. – Daniel Oct 23 '14 at 10:16
  • Until this stunning oversight in the language is rectified, check out [`Glib::ustring`](https://developer.gnome.org/glibmm/stable/classGlib_1_1ustring.html#details), an actually intelligent wrapper around `std::string` from the `glibmm` project, which wraps the normal `string` methods with proper awareness of the number of displayable characters (not encoding bytes/`char`s) in the string. – underscore_d May 21 '17 at 14:06
  • re: point 5, using 16-bit wide chars for string manipulation is simple, fast easy... and WRONG. Because, despite this answer saying that they're UCS-2, many environments are actually UTF-16, which means you have to deal with surrogates. And even without surrogates, you have to deal with combining characters. wchar doesn't protect you from any of that. Sadly, the real answer is "text is hard and complicated; learn how it really works." – Sean McMillan Sep 06 '19 at 20:17
27
  1. When you want to have wide characters stored in your string. wide depends on the implementation. Visual C++ defaults to 16 bit if i remember correctly, while GCC defaults depending on the target. It's 32 bits long here. Please note wchar_t (wide character type) has nothing to do with unicode. It's merely guaranteed that it can store all the members of the largest character set that the implementation supports by its locales, and at least as long as char. You can store unicode strings fine into std::string using the utf-8 encoding too. But it won't understand the meaning of unicode code points. So str.size() won't give you the amount of logical characters in your string, but merely the amount of char or wchar_t elements stored in that string/wstring. For that reason, the gtk/glib C++ wrapper folks have developed a Glib::ustring class that can handle utf-8.

    If your wchar_t is 32 bits long, then you can use utf-32 as an unicode encoding, and you can store and handle unicode strings using a fixed (utf-32 is fixed length) encoding. This means your wstring's s.size() function will then return the right amount of wchar_t elements and logical characters.

  2. Yes, char is always at least 8 bit long, which means it can store all ASCII values.
  3. Yes, all major compilers support it.
Johannes Schaub - litb
  • 496,577
  • 130
  • 894
  • 1,212
  • I'm curious about #2. I thought 7 bits would be technically valid too? Or is it required to be able to store anything past 7-bit ASCII chars? – jalf Dec 31 '08 at 12:11
  • 1
    yes, jalf. c89 specifies minimal ranges for basic types in its documentation of limits.h (for unsigned char, that's 0..255 min), and a pure binary system for integer types. it follows char, unsigned char and signed char have minimum bit lengths of 8. c++ inherits those rules. – Johannes Schaub - litb Dec 31 '08 at 12:26
  • 17
    "This means your wstring's s.size() function will then return the right amount of wchar_t elements and logical characters." This is not entirely accurate, even for Unicode. It would be more accurate to say codepoint than "logical character", even in UTF-32 a given character may be composed of multiple codepoints. – Logan Capaldo May 16 '10 at 17:26
  • Are you guys in essence saying that C++ doesn't have native support for the Unicode character set? – Mihai Danila Dec 15 '13 at 16:56
  • 1
    "But it won't understand the meaning of unicode code points." On windows, neither does `std::wstring`. – Deduplicator Jan 08 '15 at 22:20
  • @MihaiDanila That depends on how you define "native support". Can it store Unicode character sequences? Absolutely. Does it provide any standard class that can operate on such sequences in terms of the number of displayed characters therein, rather than just naively indexing/finding/etc by numbers of bytes, thereby possibly breaking up sequences of codepoints and getting things horribly wrong? No. And that's awful. This is 2017. I can only hope that, since we're finally getting standard filesystem and network support, maybe actual Unicode strings are faintly visible somewhere over the horizon. – underscore_d May 21 '17 at 14:11
  • @underscore_d Support for storing encoded Unicode codepoints into bytes is hardly notable as "support". And, yes, I agree that the absence of standard Unicode support in this language in the 21st century is laughable. – Mihai Danila May 22 '17 at 14:40
  • @MihaiDanila at least we do have `std::codecvt` etc. since C++11 for conversion between UTF-NN and UTF-8. Though, `std::wstring_convert` is deprecated since C++17... – Ruslan Sep 25 '18 at 14:48
8

I frequently use std::string to hold utf-8 characters without any problems at all. I heartily recommend doing this when interfacing with API's which use utf-8 as the native string type as well.

For example, I use utf-8 when interfacing my code with the Tcl interpreter.

The major caveat is the length of the std::string, is no longer the number of characters in the string.

  • 1
    Juan : Do you mean that std::string can hold all unicode characters but the length will report incorrectly? Is there a reason that it is reporting incorrect length? –  Dec 31 '08 at 04:35
  • 4
    When using the utf-8 encoding, a single unicode character may be made up of multiple bytes. This is why utf-8 encoding is smaller when using mostly characters from the standard ascii set. You need to use special functions (or roll your own) to measure the number of unicode characters. –  Dec 31 '08 at 04:39
  • 2
    (Windows specific) Most functions will expect that a string using bytes is ASCII and 2 bytes is Unicode, older versions MBCS. Which means if you are storing 8 bit unicode that you will have to convert to 16 bit unicode to call a standard windows function (unless you are only using ASCII portion). – Greg Domjan Dec 31 '08 at 04:58
  • 1
    As Greg and Joel (on software) mention, it is really important to understand how the encoding works with the API you are dealing with. Constantly changing back and forth between 8 and 16 bit encoding on a windows system may not be optimal. –  Dec 31 '08 at 05:06
  • 2
    Not only will a std::string report the length incorrectly, but it will also output the wrong string. If some Unicode character is represented in UTF-8 as multiple bytes, which std::string thinks of as its own characters, then your typically std::string manipulation routines will probably output the several strange characters that result from the misinterpretation of the one correct character. – Mihai Danila Dec 15 '13 at 17:01
  • If I want to make program (working on windows) that will be freely using many different Unicode symbols, like Japanese / Chinese characters, Polish letters, Cyrillic, etc., what should I use? Will UTF-8 be enough? – Kusavil Aug 19 '14 at 12:50
  • What @Mihai Danila said. I strongly recommend against using std::string for utf-8, especially when doing frequent string operations like concatenation and sub-string. Widestrings can take a lot of place, but if you are serious about software products and data in a multilingual and multicultural world, the use of std::string is becoming archaic, and trying to use it just litters the code in all kinds of odd places with functions that 'look correct' for most of the time. I've been in game development for nearly 10 years, on many different platforms, so I know what I'm saying. – StarShine Oct 07 '14 at 09:58
  • 2
    I suggest changing the answer to indicate that strings should be thought of as only containers of bytes, and, if the bytes are some Unicode encoding (UTF-8, UTF-16, ...), then you should use specific libraries that understand that. The standard string-based APIs (length, substr, etc.) will all fail miserably with multibyte characters. If this update is made, I will remove my downvote. – Mihai Danila Oct 07 '14 at 14:19
  • There do not seem to be any good options in standard C++ for cross-platform, international use. I recently wrote a text-driven GUI interface for a program that with custom line-breaks, semantic tagging, international characters... After researching multiple approaches, I chose std::strings using UTF-8 to store the text data, but writing a library of functions to map between characters and bytes, to perform common string functions such as text insertion, extraction and search, and to perform conversions to other formats for i/o. I came here to see if there was now a better way, it seems not. – QuesterZen Jun 22 '17 at 01:28
6

A good question! I think DATA ENCODING (sometimes a CHARSET also involved) is a MEMORY EXPRESSION MECHANISM in order to save data to a file or transfer data via a network, so I answer this question as:

1. When should I use std::wstring over std::string?

If the programming platform or API function is a single-byte one, and we want to process or parse some Unicode data, e.g read from Windows'.REG file or network 2-byte stream, we should declare std::wstring variable to easily process them. e.g.: wstring ws=L"中国a"(6 octets memory: 0x4E2D 0x56FD 0x0061), we can use ws[0] to get character '中' and ws[1] to get character '国' and ws[2] to get character 'a', etc.

2. Can std::string hold the entire ASCII character set, including the special characters?

Yes. But notice: American ASCII, means each 0x00~0xFF octet stands for one character, including printable text such as "123abc&*_&" and you said special one, mostly print it as a '.' avoid confusing editors or terminals. And some other countries extend their own "ASCII" charset, e.g. Chinese, use 2 octets to stand for one character.

3.Is std::wstring supported by all popular C++ compilers?

Maybe, or mostly. I have used: VC++6 and GCC 3.3, YES

4. What is exactly a "wide character"?

a wide character mostly indicates using 2 octets or 4 octets to hold all countries' characters. 2 octet UCS2 is a representative sample, and further e.g. English 'a', its memory is 2 octet of 0x0061(vs in ASCII 'a's memory is 1 octet 0x61)

user1741137
  • 4,949
  • 2
  • 19
  • 28
Leiyi.China
  • 157
  • 1
  • 4
5
  1. When you want to store 'wide' (Unicode) characters.
  2. Yes: 255 of them (excluding 0).
  3. Yes.
  4. Here's an introductory article: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/Unicode.html
ChrisW
  • 54,973
  • 13
  • 116
  • 224
  • 12
    std::string can hold 0 just fine (just be careful if you call the c_str() method) – Mr Fooz Dec 31 '08 at 04:40
  • 3
    And strictly speaking, a char isn't guaranteed to be 8 bits. :) Your link in #4 is a must-read, but I don't think it answers the question. A wide character is strictly nothing to do with unicode. It is simply a wider character. (How much wider depends on OS, but typically 16 or 32 bit) – jalf Dec 31 '08 at 12:08
4

There are some very good answers here, but I think there are a couple of things I can add regarding Windows/Visual Studio. Tis is based on my experience with VS2015. On Linux, basically the answer is to use UTF-8 encoded std::string everywhere. On Windows/VS it gets more complex. Here is why. Windows expects strings stored using chars to be encoded using the locale codepage. This is almost always the ASCII character set followed by 128 other special characters depending on your location. Let me just state that this in not just when using the Windows API, there are three other major places where these strings interact with standard C++. These are string literals, output to std::cout using << and passing a filename to std::fstream.

I will be up front here that I am a programmer, not a language specialist. I appreciate that USC2 and UTF-16 are not the same, but for my purposes they are close enough to be interchangeable and I use them as such here. I'm not actually sure which Windows uses, but I generally don't need to know either. I've stated UCS2 in this answer, so sorry in advance if I upset anyone with my ignorance of this matter and I'm happy to change it if I have things wrong.

String literals

If you enter string literals that contain only characters that can be represented by your codepage then VS stores them in your file with 1 byte per character encoding based on your codepage. Note that if you change your codepage or give your source to another developer using a different code page then I think (but haven't tested) that the character will end up different. If you run your code on a computer using a different code page then I'm not sure if the character will change too.

If you enter any string literals that cannot be represented by your codepage then VS will ask you to save the file as Unicode. The file will then be encoded as UTF-8. This means that all Non ASCII characters (including those which are on your codepage) will be represented by 2 or more bytes. This means if you give your source to someone else the source will look the same. However, before passing the source to the compiler, VS converts the UTF-8 encoded text to code page encoded text and any characters missing from the code page are replaced with ?.

The only way to guarantee correctly representing a Unicode string literal in VS is to precede the string literal with an L making it a wide string literal. In this case VS will convert the UTF-8 encoded text from the file into UCS2. You then need to pass this string literal into a std::wstring constructor or you need to convert it to utf-8 and put it in a std::string. Or if you want you can use the Windows API functions to encode it using your code page to put it in a std::string, but then you may as well have not used a wide string literal.

std::cout

When outputting to the console using << you can only use std::string, not std::wstring and the text must be encoded using your locale codepage. If you have a std::wstring then you must convert it using one of the Windows API functions and any characters not on your codepage get replaced by ? (maybe you can change the character, I can't remember).

std::fstream filenames

Windows OS uses UCS2/UTF-16 for its filenames so whatever your codepage, you can have files with any Unicode character. But this means that to access or create files with characters not on your codepage you must use std::wstring. There is no other way. This is a Microsoft specific extension to std::fstream so probably won't compile on other systems. If you use std::string then you can only utilise filenames that only include characters on your codepage.

Your options

If you are just working on Linux then you probably didn't get this far. Just use UTF-8 std::string everywhere.

If you are just working on Windows just use UCS2 std::wstring everywhere. Some purists may say use UTF8 then convert when needed, but why bother with the hassle.

If you are cross platform then it's a mess to be frank. If you try to use UTF-8 everywhere on Windows then you need to be really careful with your string literals and output to the console. You can easily corrupt your strings there. If you use std::wstring everywhere on Linux then you may not have access to the wide version of std::fstream, so you have to do the conversion, but there is no risk of corruption. So personally I think this is a better option. Many would disagree, but I'm not alone - it's the path taken by wxWidgets for example.

Another option could be to typedef unicodestring as std::string on Linux and std::wstring on Windows, and have a macro called UNI() which prefixes L on Windows and nothing on Linux, then the code

#include <fstream>
#include <string>
#include <iostream>
#include <Windows.h>

#ifdef _WIN32
typedef std::wstring unicodestring;
#define UNI(text) L ## text
std::string formatForConsole(const unicodestring &str)
{
    std::string result;
    //Call WideCharToMultiByte to do the conversion
    return result;
}
#else
typedef std::string unicodestring;
#define UNI(text) text
std::string formatForConsole(const unicodestring &str)
{
    return str;
}
#endif

int main()
{

    unicodestring fileName(UNI("fileName"));
    std::ofstream fout;
    fout.open(fileName);
    std::cout << formatForConsole(fileName) << std::endl;
    return 0;
}

would be fine on either platform I think.

Answers

So To answer your questions

1) If you are programming for Windows, then all the time, if cross platform then maybe all the time, unless you want to deal with possible corruption issues on Windows or write some code with platform specific #ifdefs to work around the differences, if just using Linux then never.

2)Yes. In addition on Linux you can use it for all Unicode too. On Windows you can only use it for all unicode if you choose to manually encode using UTF-8. But the Windows API and standard C++ classes will expect the std::string to be encoded using the locale codepage. This includes all ASCII plus another 128 characters which change depending on the codepage your computer is setup to use.

3)I believe so, but if not then it is just a simple typedef of a 'std::basic_string' using wchar_t instead of char

4)A wide character is a character type which is bigger than the 1 byte standard char type. On Windows it is 2 bytes, on Linux it is 4 bytes.

Phil Rosenberg
  • 1,597
  • 1
  • 14
  • 22
  • 1
    Regarding "However, before passing the source to the compiler, VS converts the UTF-8 encoded text to code page encoded text and any characters missing from the code page are replaced with ?." -> I don't think that this is true when the compiler uses UTF-8 encoding (use `/utf-8`). – Roi Danton Jan 14 '19 at 09:42
  • I was not aware of this as an option. From this link https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/build/reference/utf-8-set-source-and-executable-character-sets-to-utf-8?view=vs-2017 it seems there is no tick box to select in in project properties, you must add it as an additional command line option. Good spot! – Phil Rosenberg Jan 15 '19 at 10:57
2
  1. when you want to use Unicode strings and not just ascii, helpful for internationalisation
  2. yes, but it doesn't play well with 0
  3. not aware of any that don't
  4. wide character is the compiler specific way of handling the fixed length representation of a unicode character, for MSVC it is a 2 byte character, for gcc I understand it is 4 bytes. and a +1 for http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/Unicode.html
Greg Domjan
  • 13,943
  • 6
  • 43
  • 59
  • 2
    2. An std::string can hold a NULL character just fine. It can also hold utf-8 and wide characters as well. –  Dec 31 '08 at 04:29
  • @Juan : That put me into confusion again. If std::string can keep unicode characters, what is special with std::wstring? –  Dec 31 '08 at 04:33
  • 1
    @Appu: std::string can hold UTF-8 unicode characters. There are a number of unicode standards targeted at different character widths. UTf8 is 8 bits wide. There's also UTF-16 and UTF-32 at 16 and 32 bits wide respectively – Greg D Dec 31 '08 at 04:40
  • With a std::wstring. Each unicode character can be one wchar_t when using the fixed length encodings. For example, if you choose to use the joel on software approach as Greg links to. Then the length of the wstring is exactly number of unicode characters in the string. But it takes up more space –  Dec 31 '08 at 04:43
  • I didn't say it could not hold a 0 '\0', and what I meant by doesn't play well is that some methods may not give you an expected result containing all the data of the wstring. So harsh on the down votes. – Greg Domjan Dec 31 '08 at 04:53
  • I didn't mean to offend. But I didn't agree with your answers to both 1 and 2. I can see from Joel's argument why you may want to use wchar_t when working on a windows system. However, a regular char works just as well for i18n. –  Dec 31 '08 at 04:59
2

Applications that are not satisfied with only 256 different characters have the options of either using wide characters (more than 8 bits) or a variable-length encoding (a multibyte encoding in C++ terminology) such as UTF-8. Wide characters generally require more space than a variable-length encoding, but are faster to process. Multi-language applications that process large amounts of text usually use wide characters when processing the text, but convert it to UTF-8 when storing it to disk.

The only difference between a string and a wstring is the data type of the characters they store. A string stores chars whose size is guaranteed to be at least 8 bits, so you can use strings for processing e.g. ASCII, ISO-8859-15, or UTF-8 text. The standard says nothing about the character set or encoding.

Practically every compiler uses a character set whose first 128 characters correspond with ASCII. This is also the case with compilers that use UTF-8 encoding. The important thing to be aware of when using strings in UTF-8 or some other variable-length encoding, is that the indices and lengths are measured in bytes, not characters.

The data type of a wstring is wchar_t, whose size is not defined in the standard, except that it has to be at least as large as a char, usually 16 bits or 32 bits. wstring can be used for processing text in the implementation defined wide-character encoding. Because the encoding is not defined in the standard, it is not straightforward to convert between strings and wstrings. One cannot assume wstrings to have a fixed-length encoding either.

If you don't need multi-language support, you might be fine with using only regular strings. On the other hand, if you're writing a graphical application, it is often the case that the API supports only wide characters. Then you probably want to use the same wide characters when processing the text. Keep in mind that UTF-16 is a variable-length encoding, meaning that you cannot assume length() to return the number of characters. If the API uses a fixed-length encoding, such as UCS-2, processing becomes easy. Converting between wide characters and UTF-8 is difficult to do in a portable way, but then again, your user interface API probably supports the conversion.

Seppo Enarvi
  • 3,219
  • 3
  • 32
  • 25
  • So, paraphrasing the first paragraph: Application needing more than 256 characters need to use a multibyte-encoding or a maybe_multibyte-encoding. – Deduplicator Oct 10 '15 at 12:44
  • Generally 16 and 32 bit encodings such as UCS-2 and UCS-4 are not called multibyte encodings, though. The C++ standard distinguishes between multibyte encodings and wide characters. A wide character representation uses a fixed number (generally more than 8) bits per character. Encodings that use a single byte to encode the most common characters, and multiple bytes to encode the rest of the character set, are called multibyte encodings. – Seppo Enarvi Oct 12 '15 at 21:16
  • Sorry, sloppy comment. Should have said variable-length encoding. UTF-16 is a variable-length-encoding, just like UTF-8. Pretending it isn't is a *bad* idea. – Deduplicator Oct 12 '15 at 21:23
  • That's a good point. There's no reason why wstrings couldn't be used to store UTF-16 (instead of UCS-2), but then the convenience of a fixed-length encoding is lost. – Seppo Enarvi Oct 12 '15 at 22:13
-1

If you keep portability for string, you can use tstring, tchar. It is widely used technique from long ago. In this sample, I use self-defined TCHAR, but you can find out tchar.h implementation for linux on internet.

This idea means that wstring/wchar_t/UTF-16 is used on windows and string/char/utf-8(or ASCII..) is used on Linux.

In the sample below, the searching of english/japanese multibyte mixed string works well on both windows/linux platforms.

#include <locale.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <algorithm>
#include <string>
using namespace std;

#ifdef _WIN32
    #include <tchar.h>
#else
    #define _TCHAR char
    #define _T 
    #define _tprintf printf
#endif

#define tstring basic_string<_TCHAR>

int main() {
    setlocale(LC_ALL, "");
    tstring s = _T("abcあいうえおxyz");

    auto pos = s.find(_T("え"));
    auto r = s.substr(pos);
    _tprintf(_T("r=%s\n"), r.c_str());
}
shy45
  • 457
  • 1
  • 3
-3

1) As mentioned by Greg, wstring is helpful for internationalization, that's when you will be releasing your product in languages other than english

4) Check this out for wide character http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide_character

Raghu
  • 190
  • 1
  • 4
  • 10
-7

When should you NOT use wide-characters?

When you're writing code before the year 1990.

Obviously, I'm being flip, but really, it's the 21st century now. 127 characters have long since ceased to be sufficient. Yes, you can use UTF8, but why bother with the headaches?

  • 17
    @dave: I don't know what headache does UTF-8 create which is greater than that of Widechars (UTF-16). in UTF-16, you also have multi-character characters. – Pavel Radzivilovsky Dec 29 '09 at 16:08
  • The problem is that if you're anywhere but English speaking country you OUGHT to use wchar_t. Not to mention that some alphabets have way more characters than you can fit into a byte. We were there, on DOS. Codepage schizophrenia, no, thanks, no more.. – Swift - Friday Pie Nov 26 '16 at 23:02
  • 1
    @Swift The problem with `wchar_t` is that its size and meaning are OS-specific. It just swaps the old problems with new ones. Whereas a `char` is a `char` regardless of OS (on similar platforms, at least). So we might as well just use UTF-8, pack everything into sequences of `char`s, and lament how C++ leaves us completely on our own without any standard methods for measuring, indexing, finding etc within such sequences. – underscore_d May 21 '17 at 14:16
  • @underscore_d What you describe is the smallest of problems if you code in C++. Wide character wchat_t is fundamental type in C++, but not in C, but its binary representation is not platform-defined how you describe, it's _runtime_. So character can be 1 byte or 2 bytes long (at least) depending what actual string is stored. Unicode UTF-16 are fixed size characters. Thing is wchar_t is the type supported for certain platform on level of file system names (including windows), while other platforms use multibyte characters – Swift - Friday Pie May 21 '17 at 14:34
  • 1
    @Swift You seem to have it completely backwards. `wchar_t` is a fixed-width data type, so an array of 10 `wchar_t` will always occupy `sizeof(wchar_t) * 10` platform bytes. And UTF-16 is a variable-width encoding in which characters may be made up of 1 or 2 16-bit codepoints (and s/16/8/g for UTF-8). – underscore_d May 21 '17 at 14:42
  • @Swift Sorry, that's wrong, at least for `wchar_t` on Windows. On Windows, a `wchar_t` is a UTF-16 encoding. Simple test: wchar_t *test = L""; // Code point U+20000 In the debugger, you'll see a string of two values: 0xD840, and 0xDC00, which is the UTF-16 encoding of the character. – Steve Hollasch Nov 02 '17 at 02:17
  • @SteveHollasch you saved utf16 to it, so you get it. it's a compile-dependant primitive type that doesn't cast or limit what you try to assign to it. How API and compiler would treat ist is undefined, in general it is not same representation as ANY unicode.wchar_t as defined by windows api is 16bit per character. so what you have is a surrogate - two character with codes 0X00DC and 0x40D8. but code that would treat that as unicode array, would act properly, you just would have hard time to determine if it is 2 characters or one. On linux wchar_t is 32bit, your code will not cause a problem – Swift - Friday Pie Nov 05 '17 at 00:25
  • 1
    @SteveHollasch wchar_t representation of string on windows would encode characters greater than FFFF as aspecial surrogate pair, other would take only one wchar_t element. So that representation will not be compatible with representation created by gnu compiler (where all characters less than FFFF will have zero word in front of them). What is stored in wchar_t is determined by programmer and compiler, not by some agreement – Swift - Friday Pie Nov 05 '17 at 00:33