On 02-03-25 18:03:56 CET, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> Thus spake Robert Joop:
> > the explanation of the -utf8 option doesn't make sense, does it?

> I think the document means "8-bit characters in an unspecified code
> page" instead of ASCII; however, there's no short term for that.

so what?
from the man you like to quote: "make it as simple as possible, but
no simpler."
if it needs a few more words, so be it, but IMHO the text should be
correct.

> Here's the more interesting question: why do we have a switch for
> UTF-8 encoding, instead of determining it from the user's locale?

what is the canonical way to detect this?
(even though i contributed the use of setlocale(3) to less(1) many
years ago, i'm not sure how to do it.  UTF-8 was not yet popular then.)
perhaps we should look at how `locale charmap` does it?
looking at glibc-2.2.5/locale/programs/locale.c it seems to use some
internal information, from ../categories.def, that is not available to
normal programs?

the -utf8 should be left there anyway as an additional option,
because some systems don't have proper locale software?

rj
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager                           [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to