From: Rical Jasan <ricaljasan@pacific.net>
To: Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak@lingonborough.com>,
libc-alpha <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v4 06/11] Provide backward compatibility for strftime family (bug 10871).
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 03:52:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <76b198b7-a35e-cbaf-ee15-339a196acab2@pacific.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1326125332.562051.1478737983449@poczta.nazwa.pl>
On 11/09/2016 04:33 PM, Rafal Luzynski wrote:
> Is there any committee in glibc which would decide which way to choose?
I'm not aware of any actual committees other than consensus on the list,
so I'd like to cast my vote here. Locales are not an area of speciality
for me and I've only just kept an eye on this thread, so hopefully I'm
understanding this correctly, but on a high level, changing the meaning
of a format specifier already in use raises a red flag, compared to the
alternative of introducing a new one, with new meaning or behaviour.
Introducing a new one avoids "breaking" the code other people have
written -- right, wrong, or indifferent -- and makes "fixing" one's code
a voluntary action, if the new behaviour is actually what's desired.
That seems more appropriate to me.
Rical
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-11 3:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-28 0:49 Rafal Luzynski
2016-11-04 13:40 ` Florian Weimer
2016-11-05 10:53 ` Rafal Luzynski
2016-11-07 14:13 ` Florian Weimer
2016-11-08 11:39 ` Rafal Luzynski
2016-11-09 10:49 ` Florian Weimer
2016-11-10 0:33 ` Rafal Luzynski
2016-11-10 12:41 ` Florian Weimer
2016-11-10 18:42 ` Rafal Luzynski
2016-11-10 19:19 ` Andreas Schwab
2016-11-15 1:21 ` Rafal Luzynski
2016-11-11 3:52 ` Rical Jasan [this message]
2016-11-15 1:38 ` Rafal Luzynski
2016-11-15 11:09 ` Rafal Luzynski
2016-11-16 13:06 ` Rical Jasan
2016-11-17 11:18 ` Rafal Luzynski
2016-11-18 9:22 ` Rical Jasan
2016-11-22 23:56 ` Rafal Luzynski
2016-11-09 11:00 ` Florian Weimer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=76b198b7-a35e-cbaf-ee15-339a196acab2@pacific.net \
--to=ricaljasan@pacific.net \
--cc=digitalfreak@lingonborough.com \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).