On Tue, Mar 30, 2004 at 08:37:55AM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote: > >Actually I thought that the simple removal of check_sbcs() would be > >appropriate for 0.9 too, rather than wait for someone to find a case > >where it "does the wrong thing". > > apr_xlate_sb_get() makes no sense without an sbcs check... it is supposed > to be either for > > i. code that knows that what its doing makes no sense if conversion is not > single-byte, and just wants to ask to sanity check > > ii. code that wants to select simpler, faster buffer management if > conversion is single-byte > > the situation where the app tells us to xlate between "foo" and "foo" is > just a small (and humorous) subset of intended purpose > > removing apr_xlate_sb_get() is a change to a stable API; we don't even know > if there is any such charset for which current single-byte checking will > die, though of course the iconv handle reset bug needs to be fixed
To be clear: if there's a case where check_sbcs() gets a false positive, "die" means it will just happily hand out incorrect translations. That would not be a fun case to debug (maybe a borked iconv(), maybe a user environment screwup, maybe a terminal issue, etc). For 0.9 if the issue is to keep EBCDIC platforms hobbling along then maybe it should be left #if APR_CHARSET_EBCDIC. I'm not proposing to remove apr_xlate_sb_get() merely make it return 0 in all cases other than identity translations. joe
