Since what I proposed is obviously the wrong thing to do, I'm
wondering whether I should try redrafting RFC 69 or withdrawing it
completely, after which hopefully someone else will make a better
proposal. Please let me know. Thanks.
-Hao
Hildo,
I knew it was an incomplete proposal and was waiting to hear
reactions, keeping in mind Unicode support. Thanks for reminding me
of Larry's previous post. I will also update the RFC to document
the problem more completely.
-Hao
> Has anyone taken on RFCing line disciplines?
Working on it. Updating RFC 69
-Hao
> Perl should provide the greatest ease for the greatest number of
> people; and the majority of people reading text files are reading
> platform-native text files.
This was a big oversight on my part. Version 3 reflects this, which
should be heading your way RSN.
-Hao
uot;, "\025";
Weird OS:
use newlines "\t";
Something like that?
Okay, maybe what I really want is $/ to be a regex.
-Hao
I'll try to scrap and rewrite the RFC this weekend.
> $/ = qr/[\r\n]/f; # fast ?
How about we use the specialized DFA regex, but also slightly
different notation?
-Hao
