-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 John Cowan wrote:
> Indeed, I'd like to see all text tools accept all six known line ending > conventions: CR+LF, CR alone, LF alone, NEL alone, CR+NEL, LS. > (NEL is U+0085, LS is U+2028.) <snip> > That said, I believe it is good for portability to use O_TEXT > and O_BINARY (and their stdio equivalents) in all software intended > to be portable. Unix-tradition systems won't benefit, but it doesn't > cost anything either; other systems will be enabled to DTRT as a result. If you intend for all text tools to recognize all line endings, wouldn't it be better to always open in binary mode so the program can handle the line-endings? Relying on the system to translate _some_ line-endings seems problematic, since you won't know which (if any) the system will handle. The original could have been CR+CR+LF, with the system translating it as CR+LF, or even LF+LF+LF (some versions of Mac OS?), and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. BTW, are there systems that use CR+NEL as their canonical line terminator, and if so, which ones? That seems silly, since AFAICT NEL was intended to replace CR+LF (ISO-6429/Ecma-048 defines it as moving to to "the line home position of the following line", adjusting for implicit movement direction). But then, I'm not even familiar with systems that use NEL as a line terminator in the first place, so my ignorance is not at all surprising. ;) - -- Micah J. Cowan Programmer, musician, typesetting enthusiast, gamer... http://micah.cowan.name/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFG4Dv97M8hyUobTrERCO6iAJ9GUkHNguGsI4HSLe+Zv+R+4RANjQCeJRB7 sut0YDPbVzMqXYaS4l+vaJ0= =9WqM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
