3 ms·

"the controversial ex-post RFC 4180" I looked at the RFC. What is controversial about it?

• tgtweak 2y ago
  You mean aside from the fact it's ex-post ...
  • inglor_cz 2y ago
    Doesn't it make sense to have a common document in the usual format (RFC) which every newbie can consult when in doubt? I much prefer that to any sort of "common institutional memory" that is nevertheless only talked about on random forums. People die, other people enter the field... hello subtle incompatibilities.
• sakjur 2y ago
  Look at how it handles escaping of special characters and particularly new lines (RFC 4180 doesn’t guarantee that a new line is a new record) and how it’s written in 2005 yet still doesn’t handle unicode other than via a comment about ”other character sets”.
  • inglor_cz 2y ago
    "how it’s written in 2005 yet still doesn’t handle unicode other than via a throwaway comment about ”other character sets”" Yeah, you are spot on with this one (cries in Czech, which used to be encoded in several various ways).
  • Someone1234 2y ago
    > RFC 4180 doesn’t guarantee that a new line is a new record Correctly. A good parser should step through the line one column at a time, and shouldn't even consider newlines that are quoted. If you're naively splitting the entire file via newline, that isn't 4180's fault, that is your fault for not following the standard or industry norms. I'll happily concede the UNICODE point however; but I don't know if that makes it controversial.