From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Lucio De Re <lucio@proxima.alt.za>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] libbio and CR-LF
Message-ID: <20030224172946.A15898@cackle.proxima.alt.za>
References: <20030224170906.X15898@cackle.proxima.alt.za> <2c43986586d52f0b4b3b1878469ddbcb@plan9.bell-labs.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <2c43986586d52f0b4b3b1878469ddbcb@plan9.bell-labs.com>; from Russ Cox on Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 10:14:34AM -0500
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 17:29:47 +0200
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 706f821a-eacb-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 10:14:34AM -0500, Russ Cox wrote:
>
> If the CR is there it should be reported.
> Libbio should not do any funny conversions
> like Windows stdio libraries traditionally have.
> They confuse more than they help.

You're suggesting that Libbio for Windows should be consistent with
itself and not the underlying environment.  It's a subjective call,
but it makes sense in that only new code would use Libbio.

However, the programmer would have to jump through flaming hoops
to manage all files, as it can't be predicted which variety is
going to be encountered.  If the library can simplify this, I
believe it ought to.  Binary mode restores sanity, if so desired.

It's that, or a complicated shim, re-invented by each user of
Libbio.  At least in my opinion.

++L