Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 00:09:59 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Revisiting byte-based C locale

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:04:47PM -0500, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> Given the POSIX rules on LC_CTYPE character classes effecting
> [[:alpha:]], it seems to me now that the clear intent (if not
> statement) is in fact for a byte-based C locale. Though maybe
> unfortunate, it does seem like as though that is in fact the most
> conformant way of doing it, and conforming looks to have little cost
> now.

Not necessarily. There's no rule against the existence of additional
characters in the C locale -- in fact, the proposal to make the C
locale "8-bit-clean" requires an additional 128 characters -- but the
additional ones can't be in classes like alpha.

Rich

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.