From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: decode_eol and inconsistent EOL Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 07:51:51 +0300 (IDT) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <200204291941.g3TJfME27696@rum.cs.yale.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1020143028 1602 127.0.0.1 (30 Apr 2002 05:03:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 05:03:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, gildea@stop.mail-abuse.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, akochoi@shaw.ca Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 172Pno-0000Pj-00 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2002 07:03:48 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 172Pru-0002El-00 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2002 07:08:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 172Pna-0006tf-00; Tue, 30 Apr 2002 01:03:34 -0400 Original-Received: from is.elta.co.il ([199.203.121.2]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 172Pds-00069D-00; Tue, 30 Apr 2002 00:53:32 -0400 Original-Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id HAA03553; Tue, 30 Apr 2002 07:51:51 +0300 (IDT) X-Sender: eliz@is Original-To: Stefan Monnier In-Reply-To: <200204291941.g3TJfME27696@rum.cs.yale.edu> Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:3433 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:3433 On Mon, 29 Apr 2002, Stefan Monnier wrote: > The advantage is that it allows the inclusion of lone CR chars > in dos-style files and it makes the code simpler. Yes. Anyway, I don't feel strongly about either the current or the suggested *modus operandi*.