On 01.04.18 15:24, Lars Schneider wrote:
>> TRUE or false are values, but just wrong ones.
>> If this test is removed, the user will see "failed to encode "TRUE" to "UTF-8",
>> which should give enough information to fix it.
>
> I see your point. However, I would like to stop the processing right
> there for these invalid values. How about
>
> error(_("true/false are no valid working-tree-encodings"));
>
> I think that is the most straight forward/helpful error message
> for the enduser (I consider the term "boolean" but dismissed it
> as potentially confusing to folks not familiar with the term).
>
> OK with you?
Yes.
Another thing that came up recently, independent of your series:
What should happen if a user specifies "UTF-8" and the file
has an UTF-8 encoded BOM ?
I ask because I stumbled over such a file coming from a Windows
which the java compiler under Linux didn't accept.
And because some tools love to put an UTF-8 encoded BOM
into text files.
The clearest thing would be to extend the BOM check in 5/9
to cover UTF-32, UTF-16 and UTF-8.
Are there any plans to do so?
And thanks for the work.
