Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2015 21:39:11 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Revisiting byte-based C locale On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 11:00:10PM +0200, Christian Neukirchen wrote: > Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> writes: > > > On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 10:22:03PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > >> Any new opinions on the topic? Or interest in re-emphasizing a > >> previously stated opinion? :) > > > > No new opinions on this? I've tentatively added drafting a new > > proposed byte-based C locale patch as a roadmap item for this release > > cycle, not necessarily to commit it, but as a way to re-evaluate > > whether it's still costly to implement. > > Will it support regexec on 8-bit binary data? Yes, as long as the program has done one of the following: - Not called setlocale at all. - Called setlocale with an explicit "C" argument or in environment. - Called uselocale with a locale_t for "C". > We found out file(1) > needs this. Indeed, aside from the Austin Group issue 663, having this topic come up several times in real-world usage is the motivation for reconsidering it. I believe file(1) _attempts_ to do this right, making use of uselocale. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.