Hello RJ,
On Wednesday May 22 2013 03:29, you wrote to me:
RC>>> So, to be clear; you think that such functionality as that
RC>>> should be added and tested, before going to a version v3.4
RC>>> release?
MV>> Yes.
RC> Thing is; of the three code patches since v3.3, two (v3.3.1 &
RC> v3.3.2) were changes that (thinking about it) really could or should
RC> have been minor version changes, rather than just patches against the
RC> v3.3.0 version, because they did involve functionality changes.
Aha. In that case I misunderstood your question. I read it as a call for what
needs to be added. If however the rule is that a change of functionality should
be signalled with a change in the minor version number, then that is what
should be done.
RC> In other words; I think we should already be at least at v3.4, if
RC> not v3.5, because of the functionality changes that have been made but
RC> not yet represented by changes to the minor version number.
If you say so...
MV>> It is not a big change is it?
RC> A good question, and I'm not sure yet if it would be or not...
What it involves is:
1) Define a boolean variable allow8bit.
2) Copy the code from for example "allowunpub" to couple changing
the variable to the the keyword, Allow8bit in this case.
3) Isolate the code that replaces characters with the highest bit
set with a question mark.
4) Skip it when the allow8bit variable is nonzero.
I'd say less than 15 minutes work for someone who has the make files configured
and who has familiarised himself with the source code. At least that is what it
would take me when I was still active as a programmer...
Contrary to fixing the "OS/2 problem". If that were easy to fix, it would have
been done already. But apparently, there never was a fully working OS/2
version. So it would take a programmer familiar with OS/2 to fix it and
considering that OS/2 is dead for all practical purposes, they are scarce..
I don't think we should hold the train for a very small minority who hangs on
to an OS that is on the way out. I loved OS/2, but the reality is that it is
doomed for extinction.
RC> I do think, though, that in any case it would involve a change to the minor
RC> version number when it gets implemented because it is a change
RC> in functionality.
Agree.
Cheers, Michiel
--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20110320
* Origin: http://www.vlist.eu (2:280/5555)
|
