Anyone have strong feelings on how Exim should handle UTF-8 with
operators such as ${length_1:STR} ?
Document that the current operators work on bytes and add ulength_1 for
being UTF-8 aware? Look at the top-bit being set and assume UTF-8, or
will that break too much with all the places which
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018, Jeremy Harris via Exim-dev wrote:
Since f2ed27cf5f (between 4.89 & 4.90) we've documented
a requirement on C99-capable compilers. This was the
introduction of specified-initialiser use in the Exim code.
How do people feel about other more-modern C features?
This was
Since f2ed27cf5f (between 4.89 & 4.90) we've documented
a requirement on C99-capable compilers. This was the
introduction of specified-initialiser use in the Exim code.
How do people feel about other more-modern C features?
This was triggered by the Postgres hackers ML pointing out
that C99
