[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Fribidi-discuss] Re: FriBidi's license (was - my Bidi...)
- To: Shachar Shemesh <fribidi-discuss at shemesh dot biz>
- Subject: Re: [Fribidi-discuss] Re: FriBidi's license (was - my Bidi...)
- From: Behdad Esfahbod <behdad at cs dot toronto dot edu>
- Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 06:37:00 -0500
- Cc: Fribidi Discussion List <fribidi-discuss at lists dot sourceforge dot net>, Development Discussions <developer at arabeyes dot org>
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> Of course, my entire contribution to fribidi thus far has been a single
> bug report, and suggesting a development direction for the "new
> interface" that nobody seems to like. I am not a copyright holder, and
> thus not one who's opinion binds anyone.
I really like your suggestion about doing bidi on UTF-anything,
and constantly think about it. I have not yet found a good
solution that satisfies all my requirements:
* No source/object code duplication.
* No significant overhead for UTF-32.
* No dirty interface.
The main problem is that my beloved language, C, does not have
any type of dynamism/overloading... But I would eventually
> Well, technically there is a Linux version of putty compiled using
> winelib. That was, however, done mostly to test winelib, and not to
> bring putty to Linux.
I have even a native PuTTY based on GTK+ installed (that was a
matter of "yum install putty"), but I wonder if anybody uses