>Better to add a bit that says 'containsnulls'. MIME requires specific >behaviour in the face of NULs, as does SMTP. > >I don't like this 'isvalid7bit' idea. The suitability of a body part >for 7 bit transport can – and should – be inferred from contains8bit >and containsnulls. Adding 'isvalid7bit' makes way for conflicting >assertions as to whether the code is 7 bit or not. You could always >'#define ISVALID7BIT(foo) (!(foo->contains8bit || foo->containsnulls))'. >And similarly for ISVALID8BIT.
You're right ... I was thinking that text/plain US-ASCII technically prohibits anything < 32, with the exception of CR, LF, TAB, and NP (FF). But that's not what we're talking about here; for a 7bit CTE the proper limit is 0 < c < 128. So yes; containsnuls (don't some greybeards get grumpy if you use NULL where you meant NUL?) is the right term. --Ken _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list Nmh-workers@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
