1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
|
/*
* Copyright (C) 2007 Markus Kuhn
*
* This is an implementation of wcwidth() and wcswidth() (defined in
* IEEE Std 1002.1-2001) for Unicode.
*
* http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/functions/wcwidth.html
* http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/functions/wcswidth.html
*
* In fixed-width output devices, Latin characters all occupy a single
* "cell" position of equal width, whereas ideographic CJK characters
* occupy two such cells. Interoperability between terminal-line
* applications and (teletype-style) character terminals using the
* UTF-8 encoding requires agreement on which character should advance
* the cursor by how many cell positions. No established formal
* standards exist at present on which Unicode character shall occupy
* how many cell positions on character terminals. These routines are
* a first attempt of defining such behavior based on simple rules
* applied to data provided by the Unicode Consortium.
*
* For some graphical characters, the Unicode standard explicitly
* defines a character-cell width via the definition of the East Asian
* FullWidth (F), Wide (W), Half-width (H), and Narrow (Na) classes.
* In all these cases, there is no ambiguity about which width a
* terminal shall use. For characters in the East Asian Ambiguous (A)
* class, the width choice depends purely on a preference of backward
* compatibility with either historic CJK or Western practice.
* Choosing single-width for these characters is easy to justify as
* the appropriate long-term solution, as the CJK practice of
* displaying these characters as double-width comes from historic
* implementation simplicity (8-bit encoded characters were displayed
* single-width and 16-bit ones double-width, even for Greek,
* Cyrillic, etc.) and not any typographic considerations.
*
* Much less clear is the choice of width for the Not East Asian
* (Neutral) class. Existing practice does not dictate a width for any
* of these characters. It would nevertheless make sense
* typographically to allocate two character cells to characters such
* as for instance EM SPACE or VOLUME INTEGRAL, which cannot be
* represented adequately with a single-width glyph. The following
* routines at present merely assign a single-cell width to all
* neutral characters, in the interest of simplicity. This is not
* entirely satisfactory and should be reconsidered before
* establishing a formal standard in this area. At the moment, the
* decision which Not East Asian (Neutral) characters should be
* represented by double-width glyphs cannot yet be answered by
* applying a simple rule from the Unicode database content. Setting
* up a proper standard for the behavior of UTF-8 character terminals
* will require a careful analysis not only of each Unicode character,
* but also of each presentation form, something the author of these
* routines has avoided to do so far.
*
* http://www.unicode.org/unicode/reports/tr11/
*
* Markus Kuhn -- 2007-05-26 (Unicode 5.0)
*
* Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software
* for any purpose and without fee is hereby granted. The author
* disclaims all warranties with regard to this software.
*
* Latest version: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/ucs/wcwidth.c
*/
extern int mk_wcwidth(int ucs);
extern int mk_wcswidth(const int *pwcs, size_t n);
|
