Re: RFE: honor 'eol' setting regardless of 'binary' flag.

Christian Brabandt wrote:
>> Trying to claim POSIX compliance as a justification for this behavior
>> is what is silly. vim was born out of a desire for more than such.
>> Someone is using POSIX
>> to justify not having it be a choice.
>>
>> That's what is silly.
>>
>
> No it is not. POSIX is pretty clear here and Vim is actually adhering to
> the standard. If you like it or not. Being ironically won't make you
> more convincing.
>
----
POSIX defines the behavior for "vi" as well. Vim isn't vi.
If you want to talk POSIX, then you can only talk about vim without
extensions
and only having the POSIX compliant subset that is known as "vi".

That's why I said, if you want to claim POSIX compliance as a reason, then
you are also disallowing any behavior different from the POSIX standards
which specifies only the "vi-compat" subset.

You are claiming that a non-POSIX behavior of changing a file from
containing 0 lines, to one that has 1 line is POSIX compatible.

No where does it say that a LF should be added at the end of file.

Many unix config files don't have LF's at the end of file; they can
be redundent and confusing. If I want to know the answer to a question
and store the answer in a file as 'yes' or 'no', if vim changes that to
'yes\n' or 'yes\r\n', is corrupting a text file. It changes it's meaning.


> Best,
> Christian
>

--
--
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_use" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vim_use+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.