support of various line ends in trunk

> And in a previous email you wrote:
> On 11/16/2009 4:10 PM, Juan Vuletich wrote:
> >
> > I think you got this one wrong. In Cuis, in a workspace you can tell
> the
> > line ending of each line (cr, lf or crlf) and you can actually type all
> > three. Please try it! Use <Enter>, <Shift-Enter> and <Cmd/Alt-Enter>.
> > This way you can edit a text file, and keep it consistent.
> Otherwise, if
> > you edit an existing file that was edited with a Unix or Windows editor
> > and add CRs to it it will use more than one convention, without you
> > realizing. Showing all in the same way is misleading. Different Strings
> > should look different in the editor!
>
> I still fail to see a purpose in having more than one line ending type
> in a single document or file. It isn't natural.

> 2009/11/17 Jimmie Houchin<[hidden email]>:
>    
>> On 11/17/2009 8:47 AM, Juan Vuletich wrote:
>>      
>>> I never talked about control chars. We were talking about line ending
>>> conversions. A typical scenario is needing to edit ini files for real users
>>> that are stored in a server. I need to support users with Windows and Mac.
>>> And I want to leave the files as they need them. The best way to do that is
>>> with the Cuis editor. Then, I'm in control.
>>>        
>> You are doing this from Squeak?
>>
>> It would seem to me to be more natural for the editing in Squeak to be of a
>> single consistent line ending and then the export to your server into the
>> line ending type required there.
>>
>> Neither Mac nor Windows or anyone to my knowledge desire/require any line
>> ending outside of their native default line ending. So I fail to see why
>> this would be important in the editor and done better in the editor than in
>> the export mechanism saving the edited text to a file whether local or
>> network?
>>      
> You simply never worked with cygwin under windows, nor transfered
> files edited in windows to QNX et vice et versa.
>    

>> And in a previous email you wrote:
>> On 11/16/2009 4:10 PM, Juan Vuletich wrote:
>>      
>>> I think you got this one wrong. In Cuis, in a workspace you can tell the
>>> line ending of each line (cr, lf or crlf) and you can actually type all
>>> three. Please try it! Use<Enter>,<Shift-Enter>  and<Cmd/Alt-Enter>.
>>> This way you can edit a text file, and keep it consistent. Otherwise, if
>>> you edit an existing file that was edited with a Unix or Windows editor
>>> and add CRs to it it will use more than one convention, without you
>>> realizing. Showing all in the same way is misleading. Different Strings
>>> should look different in the editor!
>>>        
>> I still fail to see a purpose in having more than one line ending type in a
>> single document or file. It isn't natural.
>>
>> And if only one type of line ending in a document/file/string.
>> Editing (internal) line endings does not necessarily equal export or
>> external line endings.
>>
>> If you have a purpose for multiple line endings in a single
>> file/document/object/... I would like to know what that is.
>>
>> If not, then it would seem that simply having the ability to export to a
>> platform explicit version (regardless of the platform of current use) is a
>> valuable thing. But should be an explicit decision not a default one.
>>
>> Jimmie
>>      
> It's not the desire of any one, it is just reallity. Simple modern
> code editors (string editors) can deal with mixed line endings and
> most tools won't care, this is just transparent, and we can have that
> in Squeak to, it's easy and cheap.
>
> For example, plenty of squeak code did contain line feeds, and that
> did not hurt... (except when the ugly boxes were displayed).
> If we have applications with strict requirements, then no problem, we
> will continue to do the convert from/edit/convert to cycle.
>    

> 2009/11/17 Jimmie Houchin <[hidden email]>:
>> On 11/17/2009 8:47 AM, Juan Vuletich wrote:
>>>
>>> I never talked about control chars. We were talking about line ending
>>> conversions. A typical scenario is needing to edit ini files for real users
>>> that are stored in a server. I need to support users with Windows and Mac.
>>> And I want to leave the files as they need them. The best way to do that is
>>> with the Cuis editor. Then, I'm in control.
>>
>> You are doing this from Squeak?
>>
>> It would seem to me to be more natural for the editing in Squeak to be of a
>> single consistent line ending and then the export to your server into the
>> line ending type required there.
>>
>> Neither Mac nor Windows or anyone to my knowledge desire/require any line
>> ending outside of their native default line ending. So I fail to see why
>> this would be important in the editor and done better in the editor than in
>> the export mechanism saving the edited text to a file whether local or
>> network?
>>
>
> You simply never worked with cygwin under windows, nor transfered
> files edited in windows to QNX et vice et versa.
>
>> And in a previous email you wrote:
>> On 11/16/2009 4:10 PM, Juan Vuletich wrote:
>>>
>>> I think you got this one wrong. In Cuis, in a workspace you can tell the
>>> line ending of each line (cr, lf or crlf) and you can actually type all
>>> three. Please try it! Use <Enter>, <Shift-Enter> and <Cmd/Alt-Enter>.
>>> This way you can edit a text file, and keep it consistent. Otherwise, if
>>> you edit an existing file that was edited with a Unix or Windows editor
>>> and add CRs to it it will use more than one convention, without you
>>> realizing. Showing all in the same way is misleading. Different Strings
>>> should look different in the editor!
>>
>> I still fail to see a purpose in having more than one line ending type in a
>> single document or file. It isn't natural.
>>
>> And if only one type of line ending in a document/file/string.
>> Editing (internal) line endings does not necessarily equal export or
>> external line endings.
>>
>> If you have a purpose for multiple line endings in a single
>> file/document/object/... I would like to know what that is.
>>
>> If not, then it would seem that simply having the ability to export to a
>> platform explicit version (regardless of the platform of current use) is a
>> valuable thing. But should be an explicit decision not a default one.
>>
>> Jimmie
>>
>
> It's not the desire of any one, it is just reallity. Simple modern
> code editors (string editors) can deal with mixed line endings and
> most tools won't care, this is just transparent, and we can have that
> in Squeak to, it's easy and cheap.
>
> For example, plenty of squeak code did contain line feeds, and that
> did not hurt... (except when the ugly boxes were displayed).
> If we have applications with strict requirements, then no problem, we
> will continue to do the convert from/edit/convert to cycle.
>

> Jimmie Houchin wrote:
>>
>> On 11/17/2009 8:47 AM, Juan Vuletich wrote:
>>>
>>> I never talked about control chars. We were talking about line ending
>>> conversions. A typical scenario is needing to edit ini files for real users
>>> that are stored in a server. I need to support users with Windows and Mac.
>>> And I want to leave the files as they need them. The best way to do that is
>>> with the Cuis editor. Then, I'm in control.
>>
>> You are doing this from Squeak?
>
> From Cuis, actually.
>
>> It would seem to me to be more natural for the editing in Squeak to be of
>> a single consistent line ending and then the export to your server into the
>> line ending type required there.
>>
>> Neither Mac nor Windows or anyone to my knowledge desire/require any line
>> ending outside of their native default line ending. So I fail to see why
>> this would be important in the editor and done better in the editor than in
>> the export mechanism saving the edited text to a file whether local or
>> network?
>
> Possible uses for that have been said by me and others. Besides, I hate
> automatic conversions. I want to be in control of what is done with a file
> I'm editing.
>

>> And in a previous email you wrote:
>> On 11/16/2009 4:10 PM, Juan Vuletich wrote:
>> >
>> > I think you got this one wrong. In Cuis, in a workspace you can tell the
>> > line ending of each line (cr, lf or crlf) and you can actually type all
>> > three. Please try it! Use <Enter>, <Shift-Enter> and <Cmd/Alt-Enter>.
>> > This way you can edit a text file, and keep it consistent. Otherwise, if
>> > you edit an existing file that was edited with a Unix or Windows editor
>> > and add CRs to it it will use more than one convention, without you
>> > realizing. Showing all in the same way is misleading. Different Strings
>> > should look different in the editor!
>>
>> I still fail to see a purpose in having more than one line ending type in
>> a single document or file. It isn't natural.
>
> I don't see a need for that either, but that is not a reason for forbidding
> it!
>
>> And if only one type of line ending in a document/file/string.
>> Editing (internal) line endings does not necessarily equal export or
>> external line endings.
>
> In Squeak, so far, yes. What you have in the file goes into the string, and
> what's in the string goes to the file.
>
>> If you have a purpose for multiple line endings in a single
>> file/document/object/... I would like to know what that is.
>>
>> If not, then it would seem that simply having the ability to export to a
>> platform explicit version (regardless of the platform of current use) is a
>> valuable thing. But should be an explicit decision not a default one.
>
> In Cuis it is as explicit as it can be. <Enter>, <Shift-Enter> and
> <Alt-Enter> inserts one of the 3 usual line endings. And you can always tell
> them by looking at the screen.
>
>>
>> Jimmie
>
> Cheers,
> Juan Vuletich
>
>

> Jimmie Houchin wrote:
>> On 11/17/2009 8:47 AM, Juan Vuletich wrote:
>>>
>>> I never talked about control chars. We were talking about line
>>> ending conversions. A typical scenario is needing to edit ini files
>>> for real users that are stored in a server. I need to support users
>>> with Windows and Mac. And I want to leave the files as they need
>>> them. The best way to do that is with the Cuis editor. Then, I'm in
>>> control.
>>
>> You are doing this from Squeak?
>
> From Cuis, actually.
>
>> It would seem to me to be more natural for the editing in Squeak to
>> be of a single consistent line ending and then the export to your
>> server into the line ending type required there.
>>
>> Neither Mac nor Windows or anyone to my knowledge desire/require any
>> line ending outside of their native default line ending. So I fail to
>> see why this would be important in the editor and done better in the
>> editor than in the export mechanism saving the edited text to a file
>> whether local or network?
>
> Possible uses for that have been said by me and others. Besides, I
> hate automatic conversions. I want to be in control of what is done
> with a file I'm editing.
>
>> And in a previous email you wrote:
>> On 11/16/2009 4:10 PM, Juan Vuletich wrote:
>> >
>> > I think you got this one wrong. In Cuis, in a workspace you can
>> tell the
>> > line ending of each line (cr, lf or crlf) and you can actually type
>> all
>> > three. Please try it! Use <Enter>, <Shift-Enter> and <Cmd/Alt-Enter>.
>> > This way you can edit a text file, and keep it consistent.
>> Otherwise, if
>> > you edit an existing file that was edited with a Unix or Windows
>> editor
>> > and add CRs to it it will use more than one convention, without you
>> > realizing. Showing all in the same way is misleading. Different
>> Strings
>> > should look different in the editor!
>>
>> I still fail to see a purpose in having more than one line ending
>> type in a single document or file. It isn't natural.
>
> I don't see a need for that either, but that is not a reason for
> forbidding it!

>> And if only one type of line ending in a document/file/string.
>> Editing (internal) line endings does not necessarily equal export or
>> external line endings.
>
> In Squeak, so far, yes. What you have in the file goes into the
> string, and what's in the string goes to the file.
>
>> If you have a purpose for multiple line endings in a single
>> file/document/object/... I would like to know what that is.
>>
>> If not, then it would seem that simply having the ability to export
>> to a platform explicit version (regardless of the platform of current
>> use) is a valuable thing. But should be an explicit decision not a
>> default one.
>
> In Cuis it is as explicit as it can be. <Enter>, <Shift-Enter> and
> <Alt-Enter> inserts one of the 3 usual line endings. And you can
> always tell them by looking at the screen.

> 2009/11/17 Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]>:
>> 2009/11/17 Jimmie Houchin <[hidden email]>:
>>> On 11/17/2009 8:47 AM, Juan Vuletich wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I never talked about control chars. We were talking about line ending
>>>> conversions. A typical scenario is needing to edit ini files for real users
>>>> that are stored in a server. I need to support users with Windows and Mac.
>>>> And I want to leave the files as they need them. The best way to do that is
>>>> with the Cuis editor. Then, I'm in control.
>>>
>>> You are doing this from Squeak?
>>>
>>> It would seem to me to be more natural for the editing in Squeak to be of a
>>> single consistent line ending and then the export to your server into the
>>> line ending type required there.
>>>
>>> Neither Mac nor Windows or anyone to my knowledge desire/require any line
>>> ending outside of their native default line ending. So I fail to see why
>>> this would be important in the editor and done better in the editor than in
>>> the export mechanism saving the edited text to a file whether local or
>>> network?
>>>
>>
>> You simply never worked with cygwin under windows, nor transfered
>> files edited in windows to QNX et vice et versa.
>>
>>> And in a previous email you wrote:
>>> On 11/16/2009 4:10 PM, Juan Vuletich wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think you got this one wrong. In Cuis, in a workspace you can tell the
>>>> line ending of each line (cr, lf or crlf) and you can actually type all
>>>> three. Please try it! Use <Enter>, <Shift-Enter> and <Cmd/Alt-Enter>.
>>>> This way you can edit a text file, and keep it consistent. Otherwise, if
>>>> you edit an existing file that was edited with a Unix or Windows editor
>>>> and add CRs to it it will use more than one convention, without you
>>>> realizing. Showing all in the same way is misleading. Different Strings
>>>> should look different in the editor!
>>>
>>> I still fail to see a purpose in having more than one line ending type in a
>>> single document or file. It isn't natural.
>>>
>>> And if only one type of line ending in a document/file/string.
>>> Editing (internal) line endings does not necessarily equal export or
>>> external line endings.
>>>
>>> If you have a purpose for multiple line endings in a single
>>> file/document/object/... I would like to know what that is.
>>>
>>> If not, then it would seem that simply having the ability to export to a
>>> platform explicit version (regardless of the platform of current use) is a
>>> valuable thing. But should be an explicit decision not a default one.
>>>
>>> Jimmie
>>>
>>
>> It's not the desire of any one, it is just reallity. Simple modern
>> code editors (string editors) can deal with mixed line endings and
>> most tools won't care, this is just transparent, and we can have that
>> in Squeak to, it's easy and cheap.
>>
>> For example, plenty of squeak code did contain line feeds, and that
>> did not hurt... (except when the ugly boxes were displayed).
>> If we have applications with strict requirements, then no problem, we
>> will continue to do the convert from/edit/convert to cycle.
>>
>
> Nicolas, i'm also not a first year playing these games, and know by
> myself the pain of line endings
> when transferring the text files between platforms. And from my
> experience, the less magic we have there - the better.
> Give me the means to explicitly tell, what line endings a saved text
> should have, and this is all i want.
> Preserving an original line-endings is cool thing, but not necessary,
> since again, if your file going to be used on multiple platforms,
> you may need to convert it with some tool.
>
> But see, i don't care where text came from , as soon as it displayed
> well (not as a single line and no boxes instead of chars), i presume
> text import works well.
> Saving an edited text (modified by user), while preserving original
> byte-to-byte contents is much less important.
>
>
>> Qui peut le plus peut le moins.
>>
>> Nicoals
>>
>>
>

>
> Igor,
> To make it clear, I did not changed any conversion layer neither in nor out.
> All I did was to:
> - extend support for splitting a String (or Text) lines according to
> any line end conventions
>  if all have been correctly converted to cr, like due in most
> application then my changes are 100% neutral
>  if someone has specific needs, then he gained some support
> - changed rendering of lf and cr-lf to remove ugly boxes
>

> Nicolas
>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
>>
>>
>
>

> ...
> And do you normally use more than one when editing a file. Or do you
> generally have a specific one with a purpose for that file/string?
> If not it would seem that a setting in your editor for the desired
> line ending for that string would be nicer. And generally this would
> be for export purposes, because internally in Squeak what purpose does
> it have?
> I have never seen a situation where I wanted to introduce
> inconsistency into a file. If inconsistency already existed I
> preferred to correct it.
> Do you have situations where you encounter a file in an inconsistent
> state that it is actually required to stay that way? Or merely to have
> a desired line ending for its specified environment and purpose?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jimmie

> Jimmie Houchin wrote:
>>
>> ...
>> And do you normally use more than one when editing a file. Or do you
>> generally have a specific one with a purpose for that file/string?
>> If not it would seem that a setting in your editor for the desired line
>> ending for that string would be nicer. And generally this would be for
>> export purposes, because internally in Squeak what purpose does it have?
>> I have never seen a situation where I wanted to introduce inconsistency
>> into a file. If inconsistency already existed I preferred to correct it.
>> Do you have situations where you encounter a file in an inconsistent state
>> that it is actually required to stay that way? Or merely to have a desired
>> line ending for its specified environment and purpose?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Jimmie
>
> It is all pretty simple to me. I want to see what's in there. I want to
> control what I do with it. And I don't want "automatic changes". That's all.
>

> On Friday 20 November 2009 10:27:23 am Andreas Raab wrote:
>> So from my perspective displaying CR, LF, or CRLF all the same is just
>> fine. What's missing (for the purposes where I use Notepad++ or Emacs
>> for) is an editor that allows me to see and change the line end
>> convention on the file I'm editing. If we'd have an explicit File Editor
>> (instead of just a whacky workspace with a file attached to it) it would
>> serve my (and probably most other line end conscious users) purposes
>> just fine.
> line-ending conventions can be detected easily when loading a text file into a
> Workspace. Why not convert on the fly editing/viewing and restore it while
> saving?

> Igor Stasenko wrote:
>>
>> 2009/11/17 Juan Vuletich <[hidden email]>:
>>>
>>> It is all pretty simple to me. I want to see what's in there. I want to
>>> control what I do with it. And I don't want "automatic changes". That's
>>> all.
>>>
>> Then you are using wrong tool. Use hex editor instead.
>
> I think there might be a bit of a misunderstanding here. To some extent I
> share Juan's view - I like to be in control about line ends, in fact
> occasionally it's critical that I can determine the line end convention.
>
> However, I have *never* had the need to edit "mixed" line end conventions,
> i.e., CR, LF, or CRLF side-by-side in the same file. And that's why I don't
> feel the need to see the individual CRs or LFs in the editor. A setting *on*
> the editor that tells me "the line ends in this file are CR/LF/CRLF" serves
> the same purpose and with a lot less clutter. I can usually just ignore it,
> and when I have to I can check (or change) it.
>
> So from my perspective displaying CR, LF, or CRLF all the same is just fine.
> What's missing (for the purposes where I use Notepad++ or Emacs for) is an
> editor that allows me to see and change the line end convention on the file
> I'm editing. If we'd have an explicit File Editor (instead of just a whacky
> workspace with a file attached to it) it would serve my (and probably most
> other line end conscious users) purposes just fine.
>

> 2009/11/17 Jimmie Houchin <[hidden email]>:
>> On 11/17/2009 8:47 AM, Juan Vuletich wrote:
>>>
>>> I never talked about control chars. We were talking about line ending
>>> conversions. A typical scenario is needing to edit ini files for real users
>>> that are stored in a server. I need to support users with Windows and Mac.
>>> And I want to leave the files as they need them. The best way to do that is
>>> with the Cuis editor. Then, I'm in control.
>>
>> You are doing this from Squeak?
>>
>> It would seem to me to be more natural for the editing in Squeak to be of a
>> single consistent line ending and then the export to your server into the
>> line ending type required there.
>>
>> Neither Mac nor Windows or anyone to my knowledge desire/require any line
>> ending outside of their native default line ending. So I fail to see why
>> this would be important in the editor and done better in the editor than in
>> the export mechanism saving the edited text to a file whether local or
>> network?
>>
>
> You simply never worked with cygwin under windows, nor transfered
> files edited in windows to QNX et vice et versa.