0 Name: entry - needless ?


Re: 0 Name: entry - needless ?
#11
Yes, and because of that I suggest that we harden the spec and require \ in both the 0 Name: and type 1 lines:
The POSIX guys anyway need to do the conversion, and the Windows guys anyway don't have to change something.
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Messages In This Thread
Re: 0 Name: entry - needless ? - by Tim Gould - 2012-12-15, 23:57
Re: 0 Name: entry - needless ? - by Chris Dee - 2012-12-18, 12:43
Re: 0 Name: entry - needless ? - by Steffen - 2012-12-19, 1:49
Re: 0 Name: entry - needless ? - by Steffen - 2012-12-19, 18:04

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)