Path: csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: iso646.h
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 23:27:52 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <86il3bb7rb.fsf@linuxsc.com>
References: <uokhnk$eiln$1@dont-email.me> <uoqvas$1q40p$1@dont-email.me> <uor4rf$1r10t$1@dont-email.me> <87frym7l3p.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <uot08a$278i2$1@dont-email.me> <uotmed$2ack6$2@dont-email.me> <up17f9$313qt$4@dont-email.me> <up197h$31jct$1@dont-email.me> <up1t0r$37v5a$4@dont-email.me> <up2mor$3bjgb$1@dont-email.me> <up2ogd$3bs86$1@dont-email.me> <up3r9c$3hbk7$10@dont-email.me> <up47gj$3jfg4$1@dont-email.me> <87jznu1c4v.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <up4ceh$3k4b8$1@dont-email.me> <up5fk6$3t99q$6@dont-email.me> <up5u8c$blo$1@dont-email.me> <up6655$1l8b$2@dont-email.me> <up6b3v$2ff9$1@dont-email.me> <86zfwnc34o.fsf@linuxsc.com> <up97vr$l025$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e3f3945cb7164e1654b6d005c9df0f57"; logging-data="953916"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/FYd/v6tNZHsF5MZFNyr/6KT/+FUBmr2A="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:NgpRWsgdLjazKdKiHIKJCsTL5j8= sha1:tZTsZKVeMT0foFLDdClRdS4gnTY=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:381227

Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes:

> On 29/01/2024 20:10, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>
>> Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> I've never used standard output for binary data.
>>> [...] it strikes me as a poor design decision.
>>
>> How so?
>
> Because the output can't be inspected by humans, and because it might
> have unusual effects if passed though systems designed to handle
> human-readable text.  For instance in some systems designed to receive
> ASCII text, there is no distinction between the nul byte and "waiting
> for next data byte".  Obviously this will cause difficuties if the data
> is binary.
> Also many binary formats can't easily be extended, so you can pass one
> image and that's all.  While it is possible to devise a text format
> which is similar, in practice text formats usually have enough
> redundancy to be easily extended.
>
> So it's harder to correct errors, more prone to errors, and harder to
> extend.

Your reasoning is all gobbledygook.  Your comments reflect only
limitations in your thinking, not any essential truth about using
standard out for binary data.