On Thu, May 30, 2002 at 05:19:06PM -0500, Karl Fogel wrote:
> Garrett Rooney <rooneg@electricjellyfish.net> writes:
> > perhaps not, but if we just go with UTF-8 for log messages we solve
> > the problem and make life easier for client writers everywhere.
> > they're already going to have to convert a bunch of stuff to UTF-8
> > anyway, so why not be more consistent and say for all textual
> > information used by the subversion API we use UTF-8?
>
> One reason, and one reason only :-)...
>
> I'm worried about failed conversions, where the failure is not
> detected until later, when someone's trying to read the log message.
> Locale does not always reliably indicate the charset a given edit
> session is using. (At least, I know this is true in my life, so I'm
> assuming I can't be the only one).
>
> We can only convert something to UTF-8 if we know what the something
> is. If we can't know that with close to 100% reliability, then it's
> better not to transform the data at all.
well, if we're going to go down this route, then i think we should go
all the way and just let log messages be any kind of arbitrary data.
requiring no null characters in the 'string' is kind of half assed,
since who's to say there isn't a character set somewhere that doesn't
have nulls in their characters. plus, who knows, maybe someone,
somewhere has a good reason to use a jpeg as their log message ;-)
-garrett
--
garrett rooney Remember, any design flaw you're
rooneg@electricjellyfish.net sufficiently snide about becomes
http://electricjellyfish.net/ a feature. -- Dan Sugalski
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Jun 1 14:14:53 2002