On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 09:33:33PM +0000, Nuno Lucas wrote: > On 11/22/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >If we use an internal line ending standard, we should consider the > >possibility of using the standard newline character NEL, "Next Line", > >0x85, unicode U+0085. > > You are forgetting I can (and actually I am) versioning C files with > text comments using some code page other than ASCII (in my case > IBM-860, because it's a port from a MS-DOS program, and the original > programmer was Portuguese).
Does that mean that you have C code in ASCII with comments embedded in a completely different characte set? > > So, I have lot's of comments with '\x85'. If your idea goes ahead, > suddenly the project will become corrupt, because C++ style comments > suddenly wrap to the next line. Just curious -- is IBM 860 some variety of EBCDIC? And is the file record-structured so that all 256 character codes are available (in principle) for text other than newlines? So that as far as character coding is concerner, end-of-line is handled by a form of out-of-oband signalling? > >Are we currently storing files as unicode or UTF-8? (I think only admin > >information such as file names) Should we store text files as > >UTF-8? > > Don't mix character encoding problems with the end-of-line issue. They > are very different beasts. I think that end-if-line coding is one of the simplest character-coding issues. > > For example, I can have a directory with many different translations > of a document (in text, off course), each one with it's own encoding. > While I would be happy if checkout handles line endings automatically > for me, I would be very surprised if it decides to handle the text > encoding. Do we have a situation in which each file has its own encoding? Or one in which different parts of a file have different encodings? > > My current project uses ISO-8859-15 (because it's an embedded device), > but I develop in a UTF-8 environment (a standard desktop linux > distro), so all text on the source must be ISO-8859-15, not UTF-8. > > In my opinion, should be up to the user to know how to handle the text > encoding, not monotone. > > I mostly agree with the rest of your points, though. > > > Best regards, > ~Nuno Lucas > > > _______________________________________________ > Monotone-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel _______________________________________________ Monotone-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
