char to LPCWSTR CONVERSION

[Lamblion]

First off, we're talking almost at cross pupposes. I've benefitted a great deal from your posts here, and I appreciate them.

And I agree very much with you in principal, especially about the "lazy" aspect. It's harder to change those than some people think, so I think your warnings are always necessary.

Now, as in the above, I use a multi-byte project simply because I do a lot of file i/o and Unicode, even if I really understood Unicode properly, still makes file i/o harder than plain multi-byte.

I will eventually move into Unicode and learn all I need to know about it when I do. But for now, my application doesn't suffer even the slightest iota because it's not big enough to suffer, even though I know that VS takes my multi-byte progject and converts it to Unicode and back again.

So that is a case of an inexperienced programmer opting for the easy way since it doesn't degrade my app in any way.

Now then, there are other projects, such as BibleWorks, whose programmers are unbelievable. They are former physicists and they have written an algorythim that performs very complex searches on multiple Bible version in less than a tenth of a seconde, or faster. Nothing in commercial software can touch them with regard to their search capabilities on biblical texts, or other things.

I know for a fact that they use multibyte in a LOT of their routines, but they also use Unicode substantially as well. I couldn't even begin to tell you where or why they do what, but I know that they do, for I am about to produce the 2nd version of my Boss program, which is much more sophisticated than my first, and so I've had to ask them a number of things in order to get my program to interact with theirs.

But I NEVER bother them with programming advice unless it directly effects what I'm doing. However, I've seen eough to see that these guys are light-years beyond, not only myself, but other experienced programmers I've interacted with.

So I'm just saying that there are viable reasons, even if I can't give them all to you.

But once again, I absolutely support your warnings and advice, because one should learn to it "right" the first time, and then as he gains knowledge and experience he can deviate from it if and when he deems appropriate.

As I said, I believe you and freddie1 both offered good answers, and after thinking about it, I think your answer was the better over-all answer, as it was simple and also instructional.

But I understand freddie1's rationale.

In short, many times there is a lot of pontificating about this or that and not enough simple answers to the question, especially, as I keep saying, with beginners. What may seem simple to you, even when you explain it, may still be WAY over the beginner's head.

Right now he just wants and answer. In this case, you did the very best thing --

You gave him an answer but you also gave him BRIEF reasons why.

In short, you kept it SPECIFIC and SIMPLE, and that's the key, especially for beginners.