optimising OUString for space

Lionel Elie Mamane lionel at mamane.lu
Tue Oct 2 07:35:15 PDT 2012

On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 01:58:24PM +0200, Michael Stahl wrote:
> On 01/10/12 13:25, Michael Meeks wrote:
>> On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 13:02 +0200, Noel Grandin wrote:

>>> That was something I was thinking about the other day - given than
>>> the bulk of our strings are pure 7-bit ASCII, it might be a
>>> worthwhile optimisation to store a bit that says "this string is
>>> 7-bit ASCII", and then store the string as a sequence of bytes.

>> 	Optimisation ? :-) IMHO the ideal is to store all strings as UTF-8
>> underneath the hatches anyway.

>> 	The only problem with a change there is our ABI - which explicitly
>> exposes the encoding of that.

> of course this would only affect C++ binding (and possibly Python -- am
> not up to date how that does Unicode; there are differences between 2
> and 3 iirc; of course we should migrate to Python 3 as well...)

How the Python2 and Python 3.2 C ABIs deal with strings is ... a
compile-time option!  It can be UCS2 or UCS4. The actual type
(Py_UNICODE) can be a typedef for wchar_t, unsigned short or unsigned

Python 3.3 and later, on the other hand, switches between ASCII, UCS1,
UCS2 and UCS4 on the fly depending on the contents of this particular


More information about the LibreOffice mailing list