On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 02:57:59AM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > Old Mac is ASCII-compatible, but Darcs won't recognize the newlines > (since they're carriage returns).
That's presumably only because no-one has cared enough to fix that. > How do you know you've got UTF-8 if you don't know what a character > is? That's exactly it. You don't need to know. All Darcs needs to care about is whether or not it's ASCII-like. It doesn't matter if it's actually UTF-8, ISO8859-1 or cp1256. Darcs will do the right thing. > Jamie> That's a bad way of putting it. Very little is > Jamie> 'UTF-8-compatible'. The point is that UTF-8, ISO8859-x, > Jamie> etc. are backwards-compatible with ASCII. > > And so are lots of encodings that you really don't want to have to > think about. That's okay. I don't need to. Neither does Darcs. It may be /advisable/ for Darcs users (and indeed the rest of the world) to favour UTF-8, but there's no reason to /require/ it. I don't think Darcs is in a position to spearhead that particular revolution. It's already got Haskell on its hands. :-) > Jamie> I'd suggest that the current design is better. > > I'm dubious. Under what circumstances would your version be an improvement? Bearing it mind that most people are more interested in interoperability with their current setups than on jumping aboard a standards crusade? -- Jamie Webb _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
