Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.c > #12991

Re: Character Array vs String

From Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: Character Array vs String
Date 2011-11-09 14:06 -0800
Organization None to speak of
Message-ID <lnipmt9chq.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org> (permalink)
References (4 earlier) <7558688f-8b99-49d1-a318-215ea7e22d1e@e2g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> <4EBAA4F7.80503@verizon.net> <slrnjblaaj.2t4n.willem@toad.stack.nl> <4EBAAAAB.5080308@verizon.net> <51b5adde-33e6-4336-a696-75116e6ee987@d17g2000yql.googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw


Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> writes:
[...]
> But then you'd have two file formats, identical except for the tags,
> and the potential for extra costs and incompatibilities would be
> large. A bit like the decision to encode newline/carriage return as
> just a newline. It saved a byte, but to this day text files won't
> display properly on Windows as a result.

IMHO it would have been far better to define a single character that
marks the end of a line in a text file.  In an ASCII-like encoding, for
example, you might keep the existing CR and LF characters (CR specifies
moving the cursor to the beginning of the current line, LF specifies
moving it down to the next line) and add a NL character that's
specifically for use in text files.  (EBCDIC has distinct CR, LF, and NL
characters; I don't know if they're used this way.)

The use of a two-character sequence to mark the end of a line is a
concession to old hardware that needed separate commands to move the
cursor to the beginning of the line and to advance to the next one.
It's not necessary on current systems.

But we're stuck with the current situation.  MacOS managed to change
its end-of-line marker from CR to LF, but I don't know if Windows
could (or would) to do the same thing.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Character Array vs String Sheky <shekhar07.nitdgp@gmail.com> - 2011-11-09 03:09 -0800
  Re: Character Array vs String Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-11-09 03:28 -0800
  Re: Character Array vs String James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-09 06:52 -0500
  Re: Character Array vs String Quentin Carbonneaux <qcarbonn@invalid.com> - 2011-11-09 12:01 +0000
    Re: Character Array vs String 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2011-11-09 04:48 -0800
      Re: Character Array vs String Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-09 05:53 -0800
        Re: Character Array vs String "osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2011-11-09 09:44 -0600
          Re: Character Array vs String Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-10 00:57 -0800
            Re: Character Array vs String "osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2011-11-10 08:56 -0600
              Re: Character Array vs String Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-10 08:16 -0800
                Re: Character Array vs String "Joachim Schmitz" <nospam.jojo@schmitz-digital.de> - 2011-11-10 18:34 +0100
                Re: Character Array vs String Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-11-10 14:08 -0500
                Re: Character Array vs String Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-11-10 20:52 +0000
                Re: Character Array vs String Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-11 01:29 -0800
              Re: Character Array vs String Lowell Gilbert <lgusenet@be-well.ilk.org> - 2011-11-10 12:29 -0500
              Re: Character Array vs String lawrence.jones@siemens.com - 2011-11-10 12:32 -0500
                Re: Character Array vs String Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-10 12:41 -0800
                Re: Character Array vs String jt@toerring.de (Jens Thoms Toerring) - 2011-11-11 13:12 +0000
              Re: Character Array vs String David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2011-11-21 02:39 -0500
                Re: Character Array vs String Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-11-23 11:39 -0500
                Re: Character Array vs String "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2011-11-23 17:15 +0000
                Re: Character Array vs String Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-11-23 18:48 +0000
                Re: Character Array vs String Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2011-11-23 10:58 -0800
                Re: Character Array vs String Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> - 2011-11-27 20:21 -0800
                Re: Character Array vs String David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2012-01-19 02:43 -0500
        Re: Character Array vs String Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-11-09 07:48 -0800
          Re: Character Array vs String James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-09 11:06 -0500
            Re: Character Array vs String Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-11-09 16:24 +0000
              Re: Character Array vs String James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-09 11:30 -0500
                Re: Character Array vs String "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2011-11-09 16:53 +0000
                Re: Character Array vs String Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-11-09 17:05 +0000
                Re: Character Array vs String Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-11-09 08:54 -0800
                Re: Character Array vs String Tobias Blass <tobiasblass@gmx.net> - 2011-11-09 21:01 +0000
                Re: Character Array vs String "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2011-11-09 21:26 +0000
                Re: Character Array vs String Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-10 01:11 -0800
                Re: Character Array vs String David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2011-11-21 02:39 -0500
                Re: Character Array vs String Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-21 00:15 -0800
                Re: Character Array vs String Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-09 14:06 -0800
                Re: Character Array vs String Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2011-11-09 19:32 -0600
                Re: Character Array vs String Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-11-10 03:21 +0000
                Re: Character Array vs String "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2011-11-10 11:00 +0000
                Re: Character Array vs String Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-10 03:26 -0800
                Re: Character Array vs String Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-11-10 12:04 +0000
                Re: Character Array vs String Lew Pitcher <lpitcher@teksavvy.com> - 2011-11-21 12:02 -0800
                Re: Character Array vs String Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-11-23 11:42 -0500
                Re: Character Array vs String Uno <merrilljensen@q.com> - 2011-11-27 22:46 -0700
                Re: Character Array vs String Lew Pitcher <lpitcher@teksavvy.com> - 2011-11-27 23:30 -0800
                Re: Character Array vs String Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-28 00:22 -0800
        Re: Character Array vs String Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-09 13:59 -0800
    Re: Character Array vs String James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-09 08:36 -0500
      Re: Character Array vs String Quentin Carbonneaux <qcarbonn@invalid.com> - 2011-11-09 14:06 +0000
    Re: Character Array vs String Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-11-09 05:38 -0800
    Re: Character Array vs String Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-09 13:52 -0800
  Re: Character Array vs String Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-11-09 07:39 -0500
  Re: Character Array vs String "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2011-11-09 13:51 +0000
  Re: Character Array vs String John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2011-11-23 19:32 -0800
    Re: Character Array vs String James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-24 11:49 -0500

csiph-web