On Thursday, 6 May 2021 07:51:34 PDT Jens Maurer via SG16 wrote:
> > The encoding scheme of a physical source file is determined
> > in an implementation-defined manner. An implementation shall
> > support (possibly among others) the UTF-8 encoding scheme.
>
> I still think it's better to put the "shall support" requirement
> here, where the "determination" is. This also makes it possibly
> to totally omit the definition of the term UTF-8 file, which makes Alisdair
> happier.

What's the difference between an implementation that "shall support" UTF-8
encoded files under an inaccessible compiler switch and one that doesn't
support UTF-8?

The draft on R4 says:
"How the source file encoding is detected, and which other input formats are
accepted would remain implementation-defined."

So long as UTF-8 is not automatically detected or the default, this is an
intermediate solution to a problem that exists but that doesn't solve
anything. Without the final mile, we might as well not have anything.

What's the hurdle on having that final mile?

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
   Software Architect - Intel DPG Cloud Engineering