On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 01:38:07PM -0600, David Starner wrote: > > What a cheek calling "the classic Bourne-style shell" "baroque" when > > compared to Perl! > > Need we have language wars on this list?
They're everywhere, aren't they? :) (I'll refrain from joining, tempting as it is.) Anyhow, it doesn't matter; even if a language (or utility) is completely obsolete, baroque, or even "generally considered harmful", it still needs locale support if it's still in widespread use. Not having it may cause some people to change tools; it'll lead to others not switching to UTF-8, however. Not that I'd mind seeing this as an excuse to get people to switch from ancient vendor and BSD versions to GNU versions of tools. I'm tired of connecting to machines whose utilities don't even support --version ... but the same argument applies: people who still prefer those versions of tools may be more likely to not use UTF-8 than to switch. -- Glenn Maynard -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
