[cxx-abi-dev] C++0x: mangling of char16_t and char32_t

[Dennis Handly]

>From: "Doug Gregor" <doug.gregor at gmail.com>
>We don't have a mangling for the C++0x char16_t or char32_t types. It
>has been suggested that we use 'k' for char16_t and 'q' for char32_t.
>Does that seem reasonable?

I was thinking for HP-UX, char32_t would be the same as wchar_t.
If we need a mangling that treats it differently, we probably need to
add some rationale words saying why we have w, c, a, h and now k/q.

>From: David Vandevoorde <daveed at edg.com>
>Fine by me, although I'd prefer something a little more "mnemonical";  
>maybe W2 and W4.

I would think we would want to use something like W# just so we preserve
the one letter combinations.