> From my POV, this would be required in some form or another before such > a scheme could actually work. Without it we end up with an improved > win32text (good!) I still think this would be actually bad. Instead, a new extension should be written, with a name that does not have "win32" as a substring, and that has no provision for guessing line breaks by inspecting files. Regards, Martin
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4