Re: Incompatible compiler option fexec-charset

[Richard Frith-Macdonald]

On 7 Dec 2011, at 15:40, David Chisnall wrote:

> On 7 Dec 2011, at 15:32, Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote:
> 
>> No .. the idea is to let them work in whatever environment they like 
>> (latin-2 is a perfectly good example), but have the *binary*  they produce 
>> contain UTF-8 encoded strings so that the running executable will display 
>> the correct characters.
> 
> But that's not what you're testing.  Your source file contains some random 
> encoding (latin-1, I believe).  The compiler will then interpret this as 
> being whatever the current locale encoding is.  You are then specifying that 
> the output is UTF-8.  So it is relying on a conversion from 
> latin1-interpreted-as-something-random to UTF-8.  There is no possible way in 
> which this can be construed as a good idea.

I suggest you re-read the test code and comments because there's nothing random 
about using latin1.
Of course there may be errors ... but you don't seem to have found any, and 
just calling it random is not helpful.
If I'm not testing what I describe, please provide a report of why not and a 
fix.