On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 09:41:34AM -0500, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> On May 15, 2009, at 6:27 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>> Is there precedent to using non-ASCII chars in our code or can we just
>> agree on ASCII? I mean for code only, not documentation that is not
>> generated from the code, some files in www/, etc which obviously need
>> to be encoded in UTF-8.
> COMMITTERS contains several non-ASCII characters, iirc.
And it would clearly fall under the category of files where UTF-8
> However, I was just trying to be technically correct with the above
> spelling. If it causes problems, we can change it.
Well, actually it is not causing problems for me right now.
It would have caused problems for me 2 weeks ago when I didn't have
a UTF-8 capable terminal, had I wanted to hack that file. There are
workarounds of course, mine was to use gvim instead of running vim
in a terminal.
So I guess my complaint is moot...
I was just thinking of future contributers who are in similar
situations as I was. But maybe OpenBSD is just the odd one out.
Most other systems in use today seem to have UTF-8 support all the way.
Let's just wait until it really becomes a problem for someone else.
Sorry about the noise.
And I agree that correctly spelt comments are more esthetically
OT: I have to admit that one of the first silly things I did after switching
to Linux again was to install all sorts of font packages, to enjoy all
the spam using non-latin characters I get in its full glory, in mutt.
No more question marks where non-latin chars should be! The only problem
(or blessing?) is that I still can't read it :)
Received on 2009-05-15 19:39:55 CEST