Re: [liquidwar-user] "\x0d\x0a" vs "\r\n"

[Christian Mauduit]

Hi,

On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 04:54:48PM -0500, Roderick Schertler wrote:
> You changed "\x0d\x0a" in the patch I submitted to "\r\n", with a
> comment saying they're equivalent.  They aren't actually equivalent,
> the values used for \r and \n are up to the C compiler.  Eg, Mac OS
> has traditionally used \x0d rather than \x0a for \n.  For network
huh huh, interesting... That's really weird indeed. The reason I had
changed it back to "\r\n" is that gcc would complain that
"httputil.c:123: warning: the meaning of `\x' varies with -traditional"
when I switched the -Wtraditional flag on. However I don't use
-Wtraditional any more since it's pretty much useless and cumbersome.

> programming one should use the numeric form.
I'll change back to "\x0d\x0a" in next release 8-)

Thanks for this informative feedback and have a nice day,

Christian.

-- 
Christian Mauduit <address@hidden>     __/\__ ___
                                        \~/ ~/(`_ \   ___
http://www.ufoot.org/                   /_o _\   \ \_/ _ \_
http://www.ufoot.org/gnupg.pub            \/      \___/ \__)