On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 18:20:00 +0200 Irek Szczesniak wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Glenn Fowler <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 17:05:31 +0200 Irek Szczesniak wrote:
> >> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Cedric Blancher
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > On 19 September 2013 10:49, Wendy Lin <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >> I have a request about LC_OPTIONS=unicode. I believe the name
> >> >> 'unicode' is too generic
> >> >
> >> > +1
> >> >
> >> >> and should better describe what it does.
> >> >> The first patch from Roland Mainz I saw used set -o convunicode, for
> >> >> "convert to unicode". I think this, or 'convunicodeliterals', would be
> >> >> a more fitting and descriptive name.
> >> >
> >> > "convunicodeliterals" is too long. Either "unicodeliterals" or
> >> > "convunicode" would do it nicely :)
> >
> >> I'd prefer unicodeliterals, but would accept convunicode, too. Just
> >> unicode is too generic. But I am also concerned about Olga's comment
> >> about print -C to print compound variables using such literals. How do
> >> we do that without tinkering with LC_OPTIONS each time? Add -U/+U as
> >> requested by Olga?
> >
> > there are a few other ksh places where this may have an effect
> > typeset -p and maybe a few other places where ksh offers a -p option
> > to produce output that can be re-comsumed by the shell
> > there's probably a connection with -x tracing too
> >
> > "unicodeliterals" is a fine solution and I'll put that in right now
> > but I think it would be good to step back just a bit and list all
> > of the places where "unicodeliterals" should take affect, at first
> > *without proposing a solution*
> >
> > for ksh we already have
> >
> > print -C
> > typeset -p
> > set -x
> >
> > any others, in or out of ksh?
> print -v, and print %B for compound variables.
> IMO a good point for -U/+U is: They are used in actual I/O to create
> compound variable streams (one of the most undocumented and
> undervalued feature in ksh93, which has greatly helped us with our
> scripts. Just to praise it here because it solved the problems of
> parsing, data version control (just add more fields if you need them
> without breaking backwards compatibility) and performance (compared to
> streaming XML)).
> typeset -p is IMO just used internally and set -x is for diagnostics,
> right? Does anyone every tried to parse that?
dgk can correct me on this
but the idea behind typeset -p is to be able to save portions of ksh context
to be consumed later, possibly in a different { locale system platform }
so the consumer for typeset -p is ksh so it better be as portable w.r.t
unicodeliterals
> Irek
_______________________________________________
ast-developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-developers
