24 Jun
2022
24 Jun
'22
6 p.m.
The complexity reduction would be in their usage, not the implementation itself.
As I mentioned in the commit's message, there are already several wrappers for functions such as `WideCharToMultiByte()` and `MultiByteToWideChar()` across the codebase.
If you're referring to `utf8len()`, `utf8size()`, `utf16len()` and `utf16size()`: I can see why they're confusing. We could match the standard naming convention by removing `utf8len()` (which is not used anyway) and renaming:
- `utf8size()` -> `strsize()`. - `utf16size()` -> `wstrsize()`. - `utf16len()` -> `wstrlen()`.
What do you think?