Rob Browning <[email protected]> writes: > Olivier Dion <[email protected]> writes: > >> Since this is only a concern for system programming, I would argue that >> only those would need to change the default port strategy. >> >> Also, I personally would not want the default to be `error' and prefer >> `substitute'. The former would break any program that print a UTF-8 >> string that encodes a Latin character such as `é' when run on a CI that >> has `LANG=C'. > > At the moment, I still feel like unmentioned data-loss should never be > the default, i.e. I feel like you should know, and have to make a > choice, if the content of a file, or a path, or an environment variable > is "unreadable", and we shouldn't just quietly lose the information. > Though we could still make it easy to say "don't care" globally if > that's really often desired.
I agree here. Silent data corruption should never be the default, but user should be able to opt into it if (for some reason) desired. Tomas -- There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation, naming things and off-by-one errors.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
