[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Support for encoded-character

2007-04-06 08:29:07

On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 03:46:54AM +0200, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote:

On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 23:36 -0600, Philip Guenther wrote:
On Mon, 2 Apr 2007, Ned Freed wrote:
Sorry, missed that was one of the core rules. But that makes me wonder 
if LWSP wouldn't be more appropriate...

That's an interesting idea, as it would let you 'wrap' a string in the 
script without including the CRLF in the string's value.  Hmm.

that could be useful, I guess, although I personally would have
preferred adopting the common convention of ending lines with backslash
if we need this capability.  sneaking it in through encoded-character is
probably easier, though.

FWIW, I agree with the LWSP - I don't see any reason to have to escape
any line endings inside of an encoded-character block when it should be
fairly evident that nobody would want to preserve the CRLF there anyway.
Make it easy to compose the strings, and less easy to make errors.

mm  (IMHO)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>