On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 22:20, email@example.com wrote:
> Branko Äibej <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Julian Foad wrote:
> > > This is now sounding like a very good proposal.
> > >
> > > Let me just stick my neck out and ask, quoting C-Mike Pilato, "GACK!
> > > Exceptions! Why in Heaven's name must there always be exceptions?!"
> > > Not this this necessarily deserves such a strong reaction, but it's
> > > always worth asking ourselves this question.
> > >
> > > Is there any known substantial reason for allowing TAB? I know it's
> > > easy enough to allow it, and some people might have file names with
> > > TAB in them ... but I'd like a stronger reason such as evidence that
> > > people actually do have such file names (and not just in those weird
> > > cases where they also have other control characters). Another
> > > strong reason could be compatibility with some existing filename
> > > standard.
> > >
> > > If there is no strong reason, then I would suggest not allowing TAB.
> > > As I keep saying recently, it's very easy to relax a requirement in
> > > future if the need arises, whereas it is hard to tighten it.
> > Not allowing tabs would also simplify the validity test to the point of
> > svn_ctype_isutf8(c) && !svn_ctype_iscntrl(c)
> > And I can add a macro that'll do this in a /single/ lookup into
> > svn_ctype_table. :-)
That would be very nice. A couple of questions, though. Is 1954 going to
go into 1.1.2 or 1.2? svn_ctype_* functions have been marked with @since
1.2, so does relying on them for is_valid_pathname() automatically mean
a 1.2 release?
Also, will/do those functions support non-ASCII, valid XML characters? I
don't know how to enter those characters, and hence haven't been able to
> If we want to start out disallowing TABS and see how that works out,
> that's fine with me. This would mean my mail to VK Sameer just now...
> > Whups! I'm not sure if you mistyped above, or if you misunderstood
> > what I wrote. My language was technically accurate, but perhaps
> > needlessly terse. Let's try again:
> > Valid Subversion paths are a *subset* of valid UTF8 strings.
> > Specifically, they are UTF8 strings with no control characters.
> > Except, one particular control character is allowed: TAB. All
> > other control characters are prohibited.
> > So, TAB *is* allowed. Other control chars are not. Still +1, right?
> ...would be amended: TAB would disallowed after all.
> Since I'm +1 on both ways, and don't even have a strong opinion on the
> question, I'll drop out at this point. VK Sameer, go ahead and do
> whichever you think is best :-). I guess if you don't have a strong
> preference either, then just prohibit TABS, because it's one less
> exception to document.
OK, will do. Hope to send a first cut at the patch soon :)
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received on Fri Dec 3 10:36:12 2004