Re: (Informational only: UTF-8 BOM and the real life)

From: Doug Ewell <>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 07:12:40 -0600

Steven Atreju wrote:

> I'm learning in this thread.
> (And CP/M was that thing that Microsoft bought cheap to sell it
> expensively the very next day to IBM as their consumer box OS.?!

This history isn't correct either, but I'm not going to bother going
into the correct version, as it has even less to do with Unicode or
U+FEFF than the rest of this thread.

> |The reason for the text/binary distinction on DOS and Windows is
> |conversion between Unix-standard LF and Windows (DOS, CP/M)-standard
> Eh, no, here you are mistaken i think. Line endings are a
> different problem. There may be I/O libraries which take this
> flag into account even for those, but i've not seen such an
> approach yet. Seems dangerous to me, if there were.

Check the documentation.

> (The perfect approach to handle the newline problem is somewhat
> costly at runtime.

The approach offered by common libraries isn't perfect, doesn't claim to
be, and doesn't need to be. It converts between LF and CRLF, and maybe
also handles bare CR (I don't remember). This is computationally

> But this is good for the power industry and
> the hardware producers, is it.

Please, no more conspiracy theories.

> |But of course none of this has anything to do with U+FEFF.
> Not so.

In what way?

Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | @DougEwell ­ 
Received on Mon Jul 30 2012 - 08:15:46 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Jul 30 2012 - 08:15:47 CDT