Evan Buswell said:
> I'm really not saying something very profound here, so I'm a bit
> confused by the sarcastic response. For certain things it's pointless
> and inefficient to parse something and then deparse it later. It's not
> like you're gonna put UTF-8 parsing into cat.
This brings you into encoding detection and either assumptions or
guessing. I just can't believe you're willingly dragging yourself into
it.
I really don't want some special support for utf-8 in cat, because my
local files generally have the same encoding with my terminal, and I
won't lose much resources when I have to cope with differently encoded
files. But it has nothing to do with network-interfacing format, where
any spec ambiguity directly translates into either loss of resources
(bandwidth, time, processing power) or loss of clients. That's not to
mention that you may have another encoding specified elsewhere in your
delivery chain (eg. in http headers).
--
Dmitrij D. Czarkoff
Received on Sun Oct 20 2013 - 02:10:48 CEST